Migrational characteristics, biological observations, and relative survival of juvenile salmonids
Transcript of Migrational characteristics, biological observations, and relative survival of juvenile salmonids
Migrational Characteristics Biological Observations and Relative Survival of Juvenile Salmonids Entering the Columbia River Estuary
Final
Repott 1985
This report was funded by the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) US
Department of Energy as part of BPAs program to protect mitigate and
enhance fish and wildlife affected by the development and operation of
hydroelectric facilities on the Columbia River and its tributaries The views
in this report are the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of
BPA
For copies of this report write
Bonneville Power Administration
Division of Fish and Wildlife
Public Information Officer - PJ
PO Box 3621
Portland OR 97208
MIGRATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS BIOLOGICAL OBSERVATIONS
AND RELATIVE SURVIVAL OF JUVENILE-SALMONIDS ENTERING THE
COLUMBIA RIVER ESTUARY 1966-1983
by Earl M Dawley
Richard D Ledgerwood Theodore H Blahm
Carl W Sims Joseph T Durkin Richard A Kirn Andris E Rankis Gerald E Monan
and Frank J Ossiander
Final Report of Research Funded by
Bonneville Power Administration US Department of Energy
Division of Fish and Wildlife PO Box 3621
Portland Oregon 97208 Contract DE-Al79-84BP39652
and
Coastal Zone and Estuarine Studies Division Northwest and Alaska Fisheries Center
National Marine Fisheries Service National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
2725 Montlake Boulevard Fast Seattle Washing ton 98112
April 1986
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull
GENERAL STUDY AREA bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull
SECTION I--FALL CHINOOK SALMON 1966-1972 bull bull bull
Introduction bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull
Methods bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull
Definition of Stocks bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull
Releases of Marked Hatchery Fish bull bull
Results and Discussion bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull
Distribution bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull
Diel Movement Patterns bull bull bull bull bull bull
Migration Timing bull bull bull bull bull
Rates of Downstream Movement bull bull bull bull bull bull
Effect of Size at Release bull bull bull bull
Effect of Release Location bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull
Effect of River Flow bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull
Size and Estuarine Residency bull bull bull bull bull bull
Relative Survival of Hatchery Fall Chinook Salmon
Conclusions bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull
SECTION II--COHO SALMON 1966-1971 bull bull bull bull bull bull
Introduction bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull
Methods bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull
Results and Discussion bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull
Annual and Monthly Catches bull bull bull bull bull bull
Timing of Annual Migration bull bull bull bull bull bull
bull
bull bull
bull
bull
bull bull bull
bull bull bull
bull bull bull
bull bull bull bull
bull bull bull
bull bull
bull bull bull bull
bull bull bull
bull bull
bull bull bull bull
bull bull bull
bull bull
bull bull bull bull
bull bull
bull bull bull bull
bull bull
bull bull bull bull
bull bull bull
bull bull
bull bull bull
bull
bull
bull bull
bull bull
bull
bull
bull bull
bull bull
bull bull
bull
bull
bull bull
bull
Page
1
4
7
bull 7
bull 7
bull 9
10
10
bull 10
bull 15
bull 15
bull 21
21
bull 27
bull 27
27
32
38
41
41
42
42
42
42
Page
Rates of Movement bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull 51
Variation in Hourly Seine Catches bull bull bull bull bull bull 58
Fish Length in Relation to Seaward Migration bull bull bull bull bull bull bull 58
Conclusions bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull 63
SECTION III--SALMONIDS 1977-1983 bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull 64
Introduction bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull 64
Methods bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull 64
Sampling bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull 64
Analysis bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull 69
Relative Survival bull bull bull bull bull 69
Results and Discussion bull bull bull bull bull bull bull 70
Migrational Timing bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull 73
Spring and Summer Migration bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull 73
Fall and Winter Migration bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull 73
Movement Rates bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull 79
Stocks Downstream from John Day Dam bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull 81
Stocks Upstream from John Day Dam bull bull bull bull bull bull 86
Variability of Catch bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull 89
Diel Patterns bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull 89
River Flow bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull 93
Fish Size and Location of Sampling bull bull bull bull bull bull bull 96
Replicate Groups of Marked Fish bull bull bull bull bull bull bull 104
Relative Survival in Relation to Controlled Treatments bull bull 106
Fish Size bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull 106
Transportation Past Dams bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull 111
Serial Releases
Stocks
Nutrition bull bull
bull bull
bull bull bull
bull bull bull
bull bull bull bull bull
Rearing Density bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull
Catch Rate Models for Subyearling Chinook Salmon bull bull
Survival of Subyearling Chinook Salmon to the Estuary bull bull bull
Page
112
120
120
120
bull 125
129
Decreased Catches Related to the Eruption of Mount St Helens bull bull 129
Characteristics of Wild Stocks bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull
Timing Size and Catch Rates bull bull bull bull bull bull bull
Movement Rates bull bull bull
Conclusions bull bull
SECTION IV--ANCILLARY STUDIES
bull bull bull
bull bull
131
131
131
131
136
Food Consumption of Juvenile Salmonids Captured at Jones Beach bull bull bull 136
Introduction
Methods bull bull
bull bull bull
bull bull bull bull
bull bull bull bull bull bull
bull bull bull bull bull bull
bull bull
bull bull
bull bull
Stomach Fullness bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull
Diet Composition and Overlap bull bull
Proximate Analysis bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull
136
138
138
139
140
Stomach Content Weight bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull 140
Non-Feeding Juveniles 1979-81 and Some Effects from the Eruption of Mount St Helens bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull 141
Subyearling Chinook Salmon bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull
Yearling Chinook Salmon bull bull
Coho Salmon bull bull
Steelhead bull bull
bull bull bull bull bull bull bull
bull bull bull
bull bull
141
146
149
149
Diet of Subyearling Chinook Salmon and Effects of the 1980 Eruption of Mount St Helens bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull
Insecta
Crustacea bull bull
Miscellaneous Prey
Geographical Differences bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull
Page
152
bull 152
152
159
159
Feeding Characteristics of Juveniles Entering the Estuary bull bull bull bull bull 159
Stomach Fullness Comparisons bull bull bull bull bull bull 159
Subyearling Chinook Salmon bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull 159
Yearling Chinook Salmon bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull 167
Coho Salmon
Steelhead bull bull
Interspecific Comparisons
Effects of Time and Tide
Diet Composition and Overlap
bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull
bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull
171
bull 171
bull 175
175
175
Proximate Analysis bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull 179
Stomach Content Weight bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull
Discussion
179
179
Compensation Mechanism for Low Food Availability bull bull bull bull bull bull bull 184
Food Consumption Compared With Juveniles in Other Locations 184
Subyearling Chinook Salmon
Yearling Chinook Salmon bull bull
Coho Salmon and Steelhead
184
186
bull 186
Food Consumption at Hatcheries bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull 186
Interspecific Interaction bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull 187
Conclusions bull bull bull 187
Visceral Fat Content of Subyearling Chinook Salmon Captured at Jones Beach bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull
Introduction bull bull
Methods
Results
Conclusions bull bull
bull bull bull
bull bull
bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull
bull bull bull bull
bull u bull bull
bull bull bull
bull bull bull bull bull bull
bull bull
bull bull bull e bull
bull bull bull bull
bull bull
Catches of Non-Salmonids bull bull bull bull bull bull bull
Introduction
Results bull bull
bull bull
bull bull
bull bull bull
bull bull
bull bull
bull bull
bull bull
bull bull
bull bull
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
LITERATURE CITED
bull bull
bull bull
bull bull bull bull bull
bull bull
Page
190
190
190
190
190
195
195
195
198
200
201
APPENDIX A--Uses of Estuarine Catch Data and Biological Samples or Observations collected for Related Research bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull 215
APPENDIX B--Miscellaneous Tables Relating to Migration of Juvenile Salmonids bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull 224
INTRODUCTION
Natural runs of salmonids in the Columbia River basin have decreased as a result of hydroelectric-dam development poor land- and forestshymanagement and over-fishing (Raymond 1979 Netboy 1980) This has necessitated increased salmon culture to assure adequate numbers of returning adults Hatcheries are now the primary source of salmon for the Columbia River in the late 1970s they annually produced about 100 million fall chinook salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha 21 million spring and summer chinook salmon 30 million coho salmon O kisutch and 10 million steelhead Salmo gairdneri Even with hatchery production at this level management agencies agree that in general salmonid harvests have deteriorated
Hatchery procedures and facilities are continually being modified to improve both the efficiency of production and the quality of juveniles produced Initial efforts to evaluate changes in hatchery procedures were dependent upon adult contributions to the fishery and returns to the hatchery Since salmonid survival depends on river estuarine and ocean habitats the variations in adult return data are difficult to evaluate and unknown factors may overshadow the impacts of changes in hatchery culture techniques--a better system of evaluation was needed
From 19 6 6-1972 the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Northwest and Alaska Fisheries Center Coastal Zone and Estuarine Studies Division developed and refined procedures for sampling juvenile salmon and steelhead entering the Columbia River estuary and ocean plume (Fig 1 ) The sampling of hatchery fsh at the terminus of their freshwater migration assisted middotin evaluating hatchery production techniques and identifying migrational or behavioral characteristics that influence survival to and through the estuary
Because of a lack of funds no sampling was done from 1973 through 1976 From 1977 through 1983 the Northwest Regional Council and the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) funded the estuarine sampling program to provide assessment of salmonid outmigrations from wild stocks and from mitigation hatcheries experimenting with enhanced cultural procedures The facilities or procedures implemented for safe juvenile salmonid passage at dams and through reservoirs were also evaluated Extensive fish marking programs by state and federal fishery agencies provided the capability to assess migrational behavior and relative survival of identifiable hatchery and wild stocks Fall chinook salmon (subyearlings) particularly provided a consistent and thorough index because of intenive marking programs to assess contribution (Vreeland 1984)
The Columbia River estuary sampling program was unique in attempting to estimate survival of different stocks and define various aspects of migratory behavior in a large river with flows during the spring freshet from 4 to 17 thousand cubic DEters per second (m3second) Previous knowledge of estuarine sampling for juvenile salmonids was limited to several small river systems and the evaluation of movement behavior residence times and feeding behavior eg Chehalis River Herrman 1971 Siuslaw River Nicholas et al 1979 Sixes River Reimers 1973 and Bottom 1981 Nanaimo River Healey 1980 and Yaquina River Myers 1980
I
During our initial research (1966-1972) various fishing methods (fyke trawl gill and seine nets) were used at many locations throughout the estuary Procedures and sites used from 1977-1980 and 1981-1983 were adopted from earlier work with the extension of sampling sites into marine waters adjacent to the mouth of the Columbia River
The specific objectives of the overall study with juvenile salmonids were as follows (objectives were expanded with time Objectives 1-4 apply to research from 1966 through 1972 and Objectives 1-10 apply to research from 1977 through 1983)
1 Evaluate sampling equipment develop procedures and establishsuitable sampling sites which could provide the recovery of representative samples of juvenile salmonid migrants from each fish stock passing through the estuary
2 Document recovery dates for all marked fish define migrationtiming for each species and examine the differences between identifiable races and stocks in relation to biological cultural and migrational variables
3 Document movement rates between release and sampling sites andevaluate effects from environmental and biological variables
4 Examine diel movement patterns at Jones Beach
5 Evaluate consistency of recovery percentages and determine theeffects of river flow
6 Provide capture percentages of marked groups to estimate relativesurvival of juvenile migrants in relation to
a Fish production at mitigation hatcheries
b Juvenile bypass systems at dams
c Transportation programs
d Fish size release site and date
e Survival to adulthood
f River flows and electrical power production
7 Compare recovery data of marked wild fish to recovery data ofhatchery stocks
8 Examine stomach contents of tagged salmonids to determine theextent of inter- and intra-specific competition for food throughout the 1979-1983 migration period and relate stomach fullness to variables which may have affected feeding habits Compare observed feeding rates to those of fish from other areas
2
9 Provide samples and make biological observations to assist otherinvestigators working on related research projects (Appendix A)
10 Document catches of non-salmonids collected during sampling
3
GENERAL STUDY AREA
For the purposes of this study the Columbia River estuary is defined as 75 km of the lower river between the narrows at Jones Beach to the ends of the jetties at the river mouth (Fig 1) The estuary is approximately 2 km wide at the mouth and nearly 15 km wide at its broadest expanse near the middle For the most part it is a shallow (lt5 m in depth) system of shifting sand bars extensive mud flats and numerous islands A ship channel is maintained at a depth of 14 m by periodic dredging by the US Army Corps of Engineers Tides normally reverse river flow as far as 115 km upstream ( to Rainier Oregon) but the seawater intruf ion is generally limited to about 38 kmupstream from the river mouth By this definition the Columbia River estuary consists of an upper freshwater and a lower brackish water component
Marine waters sampled were near-shore areasmiddot from the surfline (4 m deep) to 24 km offshore (125 m deep) north and south of the Columbia River mouth Surface water salinity varied from 17 to 27 degoo
The sampling sites varied during the various time periods of the study During the initial stages of the estuarine study (1966-1977) 33 sampling sites were evaluated for providing re pre sen ta ti ve catches of most salmonid stocks migrating into the estuary (Fig 2) During 1978-1980 there were two primary sampling sites (1) the upper extreme of the estuary at Jones Beach River Kilometer (RKm) 75 and (2) near the lower margin of the estuary in brackish water at McGowan WA (RKm 16) Additional sites throughout the estuary river mouth and in the Columbia River coastal near-shore plume were sampled intermittently to provide additional information about movement through the estuary From 1981 to 1983 only the Jones Beach site was sampled evaluation was limited to factors impacting fish during their migration to the estuary eg cultural treatment prior to release fish size distance and date of migration and river flow
JJ US Army Corps of Engineers 1960 Interim report on 1959 current measurement program Columbia River at mouth Oregon and Washington Portland Oregon middot
4
Klipsan Beach
- Seaside
f
WASHINGTON
lampaa 012345
km
OREGON
Figure 1--Map of lower Columbia River and estuary
Beach SeineSites bull
bull -0(
Exposed at low fide lit
COLUMBIA RIVER
ESTUARY
WASHINGTON
I I I I I I 0 1 2 3 4 5
Kilometers
OREGON
Figure 2--The Columbia River estuary showing beach seine sampling sites and purse seine sampling areas
SECTION --FALL CHINOOK SALMON 1966-1972
Introduction
Fall chinook salmon are an important fishery resource in the Pacific Northwest The Columbia River has long been recognized as the largest producer of fall chinook salmon in the world Hydroelectric and other development however has seriously reduced the natural production of the Columbia River system To compensate for this loss natural production of fall chinook salmon is now supplemented by an extensive system of state and federal hatcheriesmiddotmiddot (Fig 3) The effectiveness of this hatchery sys tem is dependent upon the continuing development of new and improved management and production techniques This in turn requires biological and fishery catch studies to evaluate the impact of various production techniques Cleaver 1969a) provided significant information on the life history and ocean survival of Columbia River fall chinook salmon and recent papers have examined the contribution of Columbia River hatchery fish to the fishery Worland et al 1969 Lander 1970) However information relative to the migra tional behavior of juvenile fall chinook salmon to and through the Columbia River estuary is limited
Heretofore most assessments of the effectiveness of hatchery production techniques were based on evaluations of adult returns to the various fisheries andor hatcheries Such evaluations must await the return of adult fish which normally spend from 2 to 5 years in the ocean Although it may be conceded that the ultimate measure of the effectiveness of fish culture operations should be in terms of adult catch and escapement to the hatcheries assessments of juvenile survival to the estuary could be of distinct help to fishery managers Relative survival of marked juveniles to the estuary could for example provide initial clues to the success or failure of a particular rearing or release technique in relation to the prevailing hatchery and in-river environment This information would be available to managers within weeks instead of years
The specific objectives of this study were to provide information on movement rates and survival of juvenile fall chinook salmon during migration to the estuary and to examine migration timing movement pat terns and residence time in the estuary
Methods
The downstream migration of juvenile fall chinook salmon was sampled in the Columbia River estuary from 1966 through 1972 The primary sampling gear was a 95-m variable-mesh beach seine developed and described by Sims and Johnsen 1974) This net fished to a depth of 3 m and was set from the beach with a small outboard-powered boat Thirty-three beach seine sampling sites were used during the study (Fig 2) Sampling effort varied as to site and intensity each year but was primarily concentrated at Jones Beach Oregon (Site J-1 in the upper estuary) The Jones Beach Site is located approximately 75 km upstream from the river mouth and about 50 km above the
7
WASHINGTON
OREGON
Stayton Ponds A Aumsvi lie Ponds
C 0
E C
()
Figure 3--The lower Columbia River and major fall chinook salmon producing hatcheries
normal upper limit of saline intrusion Site H-1 on nearby Puget Island and Site J-2 on the Washington shore immediately across the river from Jones Beach were also sampled frequently during various phases of the study Most beach seining effort in the lower estuary was concentrated in the Clatsop Spit area (Sites A-1 and B-1)
In 1967 1968 and 1969 purse seines were used to sample deep-water channels and other areas where beach seining was not practical Purse seines of various sizes were used depending on the physical characteristics of the area to be sampled The basic purse seine was 229 m long by 10 m deep A 152- bymiddot 3-m net was used in shallow or restricted areas Net design and operational techniques are described by Johnsen and Sims (1973)
A two-door mid-water trawl was used in 1966 to define vertical distribution of juvenile fall chinook salmon in deep water areas This net had an opening of 3 by 6 m and could be fished from surface to bottom by adjusting door angle and towing speed
During the first 2 years beach and purse seine sampling crews processed their catches and recorded all data where the fish were caught Fish holding and processing facilities were constructed at Jones Beach in 1968 After 1 May 1968 beach and purse seine samples from nearby areas were transported to the beach facility for examination All juvenile salmonids were anesthetized identified enumerated examined for marks and brands and a subsample measured to determine length frequencies Marked or branded fish were given an additional mark by freeze branding (Mighell 1969) Following recovery from effects of the anesthetic all fish were returned to the river
Definition of Stocks
Because of their extended freshwater residence juvenile spring chinook salmon are generally at least 10 to 20 mm longer than fall chinook salmon when they enter the estuary (Mains and Smith 1964) This characteristic size difference was used to separate fall chinook salmon from spring stocks Because there is a slight overlap at times in length frequencies of the fall and spring stocks a small percentage of the fish could have been erroneously identified Occasionally small numbers of fall chinook salmon may also hold over for various reasons in fresh water until the following spring These fish--because of their extended growth--would be classified as spring chinook salmon unless they bore some special identity ( fin clip or brand) clearly signifying their fall chinook salmon origin
Like fall chinook salmon juvenile summer chinook salmon stocks from the mid-Columbia also migrate downstream as O age fish and therefore can not be differentiated from fall chinook salmon by size The relative number of juvenile summer chinook salmon reaching the estuary is small in comparison to fall chinook salmon for the purpose of this study they have been classified as fall chinook salmon and included in the fall chinook salmon catch totals
9
Releases of Marked Hatchery Fish
About 6 5 million fr-eeze-branded juvenile fall chinook salmon were released at various hatcheries and other locations by cooperating agencies during 1968 1969 and 1970 Migrational timing and rates of downstream movement were determined from recoveries of these marks at Jones Beach
Some releases of branded fish were also designed to examine relative survival of hatchery-reared fall chinook salmon Groups of fish were divided into duplicate or multiple lots (each lot identical in size distribution to all others) Each lot of fish was given a separate identifying brand and released at various locations upstream from the Jones Beach sampling site Estimates of relative survival of the various lots were based on the percentage of brands recovered at Jones Beach assuming that survival from those releases closest to Jones Beach was 100 Survival rates estimated in this manner were subject to two additional assumptions (1) that the distribution of all lots of marked fish from a given subdivided group was the same at the point of sampling and (2) that each lot of fish within a subdivided group was equally vulnerable to capture by the sampling gear Comparisons of relative survival rates compiled in this manner were valid only for lots within a given subdivided group Comparisons of groups of fish from dif ferent hatcheries or from groups of different size from the same hatchery were not valid because the sampling recovery rate may be variable
Results and Discussion
Sampling in the Columbia River estuary from 196 6 to 1972 captured more than a million juvenile fall chinook salmon (Table 1) included were more than 30000 marked f ingerlings re pre sen ting 59 separate marked releases The beach seine was by far the most effective sampling gear used to capture fall chinook salmon in the estuary and accounted for almost 98 of the total sample The beach seine was adaptable to near-shore areas throughout the estuary and fish taken by this gear were generally in good condition and suffered little mortality Beach seines were also effective in capturing yearling coho salmon but took relatively few juvenile spring chinook salmon or steelhead trout
From 6 June to 19 July 1968 18 groups of juvenile fall chinook salmon were taken from the beach seine catches at Jones Beach marked with a thermal brand and released at Beaver Terminal about 45 km above the Jones Beach site (Table 2) Analysis of the recovery data from these releases indicates that the sampling variability of the beach seine was closely related to size of fish--the smaller the fish the higher the rate of capture (Fig 4)--and was not significantly affected by river flow (Fig 5)
Dis tri bu tion
Juvenile fall chinook salmon were found concentrated in the shallow near-shore areas throughout the estuary The concentration of fall chinook salmon along the beaches is illustrated by comparing adjacent beach and purse
IO
Table 1-- Sampling effort and catches of juvenile fall chinook salmon in the Columbia River estuary 1966-72
Tne of gear Beach seines Purse seines Trawls
Year No sets Catch No sets Catch middot No sets Catch
1966 1867 139058 0 465 4171 1967 1425 76988 100 1716 0
1968 2359 314334 439 9323 0
1969 2460 283386 164 4 03-8 0
1970 2509 229880 0 0
1971 1242 131425 0 0
1972 945 97299 Omiddot 0
Totals 12middot 807 1272370 703 15077 465 4171
11
Table 2-- Beach seine recoveries of marked fall chinook salmon at Jones Beach Oregon from 18 groups of marked fish seined in the estuary and released upstream at Beaver Oregon 6 June - 19 July 1968
Date Number Number released released middot recovered
6 June 847 7 10 June 712 5
13 June 1019 7 middot18 June 1377 10 21 June 1791 13 24 June 1235 8 26 June 2557 19 27 June 2524 21
1 July 4597 29 3 July 4935 34 5 July 6750 41 8 July 5186 27
10 July 13504 63 11 July 6302 27 15 July 10 797 46 16 July 3565 15 18 July 5715 28 19 July 3519 19
Percent Mean length at recovered recovery (mm)
083 680 070 705 069 741 o 73 721 073 74 7 065 744 074 693 083 694 063 747 069 725 o 61 742 052 762 047 785 043 770 043 799 042 794 049 801 054 799
River flow a (cfs x 1000)
352 391 416middot 406 396 388 346 321 301 301 299 309 325 348 322 291 283 260
aRiver flows at Bonneville Dam from Annual Fish Passage Report - 1968 North - Pacific Division US Army Corps of Engineers processed report
12
09
Y= -003218+30I bull
08 r =-090
-
bull Q) bull
CJ
07 bull
Q -
w
06
w
gt bull
bull
Oo bull
04
03-r--------------r---------60 65 70 75 80
MEAN FORK LENGTH ( mm)
85
Figure 4--Relationship of fork-length to rate of beach seine recapture at Jones Beach Oregon for 18 groups of marked juvenile fall chinook salmon released at Beaver Oregon 6 June-19 July 1968
13
09
Y=000I34X+0l6
bull bull r = 045
08
07 a
o 06
bull
05 bull
bull
bull bull bull
04 250 300 350 400 450 500
RIVER FLOW ( cfs x 1000)
Figure 5--Relationship of river flow to rate of beach seine recapture at Jones Beach Oregon for 18 groups of marked juvenile fall chinook salmon released at Beaver Oregon 6 June-19 July 1968
14
seine catches (Table 3) Relative abundance of fall chinook salmon was about 15 times greater in near-shore waters at Jones Beach than in the adjacent channel area during the 1968 sampling seas9n By contrast yearling chinook salmon coho salmon and steelhead were most abundant in the offshore channel areas
When in deep water juvenile fal l chinook salmon were found to concentrate near the surface Trawl samples from the channel off Tongue Point Clatsop Spit and Jones Beach (Fig 2) in 1966 showed that more than 9 5 of all juvenile fall chinook salmon were within 3 m of the surface (Table 4)
Diel Movement Patterns
Two tests were made in 1966 to examine diel movement patterns of migrating fall chinook salmon fingerlings in the Columbia River estuary The first test ran from 26 to 29 May at Site H-1 on lower Puget Island (Fig 2) A single beach seine set was made each hour on the hour for the duration of a 30-h tes t period This procedure was repeated at the Jones Beach site on 13 to 16 June To compensate for possible tidal influence on movement patterns the Puget Island test was started on a flood tide cycle and the Jones Beach test on an ebb tide cycle About 90 of the fall chinook salmon taken during both tests were caught during daylight hours (Fig 6) The pattern of movement was almost identical at both si tes--peak movement in the morning between 0800 and 1100 h followed by an afternoon decline and a second though smaller peak in the evening between 1800 and 2000 h Tidal conditions did not affect this movement pattern Purse seine fishing in the ship channel adjacent to Jones Beach in 1968 and 1969 substantiated this daytime movement
An additional experiment was made during 1 day of each test Groups of fall chinook salmon fingerlings from the beach seine catches were marked and released back into the seining area at 0800 and 2200 h Recaptures of these marked fish showed that fish released in darkness remained in the area much longer than those released during daylight (Table S) Both experiments indicated little movement of fall chinook salmon in the estuary after dark
Migration Timing
Timing of the juvenile fall chinook salmon migration into the estuary from 1966 to 1972 is shown in Figure 7 This information is based upon morning ( 0550-1200 h) beach seine catches each year at the Jones Beach site from 28 April through 2 September Sampling over the entire year showed that approximately 80 of the juvenile fall chinook salmon entering the estuary do so during this period
Movement into the estuary is generally bimodal--an early peak in May and early June a decline later in June and a second and usually higher peak in late July or early August The seaward migration remains heavy to September and then gradually declines The decline in the number of fall chinook salmon entering the estuary in June is unexplained but could be associated with the high river flows that generally occur during this period
15
Table 3 -- Beach seine and purse seine catch per effort (average number of fish per set) at Jones Beach Oregon 1 May-31 July 1968
Catch 2er set Type of fishing middot Number Fall Yearling gear and month of sets chinook chinook Steelhead
Beach seine
May 139 1776 21 11 June 178 1644 01 00
July 147 4970 oo 00
Average 2740 07 03
Purse seine
May 120 157 121 313 June 100 249 04 14
July 114 141 01 01
Grand Average 179 45 117
16
middot Coho
251middot 06 02
78
613 15 02
226
Table 4- Mid-water trawl catches of juvenile fall chinook salmon at various depths and locations in the Columbia River estuary 1 June - 31 July 1966
Fishing depth
Surface (O - 3 m)
Mid-depth (3 - 6 m)
Bottom (below 6 m)
Jones Beach No fish Percent
1510 963
57 36
l 01
Tongue Point Clatso2 Mo bull fish Percent No fish
662 952 321
33 48 6
0 00 1
a Catch represents 10 trawl hauls at each depth at each location
17
SJ2i Percent
979
18
03
co
Table 5--Beach seine recoveries of marked fall chinook salmon released during daylight and darkness at Puget Island (26 Nay 1966) and at Jones Beach (14 June 1966)
Area and time No of fish No hours from release to recaEture Total recaptures of release released 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Number Percent
Number of fish Puget Island
0800 hours 500 5 1 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 9 18
2200 hours 500 53 36 17 18 5 3 0 1 1 134 268
Jones Beach
0800 hours 500 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 08 2200 hours 500 61 33 27 21 8 0 0 3 0 153 306
200
1- 150wCl)
a 100 c ()
u 50
200 _
o 150w a
c i= 100 lt1 ()
50
-
30 sect _J w gt w15 _J
w 0 j
12pm 6pm 12om 6am 12pm 6pm 12om 6am t2pm 6pm 12am 6am 12pm
Moy 26 Moy 27 May 28 Moy 29
PUGET ISLAND
30_ E
_J w
15 Gj_J
w 0 0
_
6pm12om 6am12pm 6pm12om 6am12pm 6pm12am 6omt2pm
June 13 June 14 June 15 June 16
JONES BEACH
Figure 6--Beach seine catch distribution of juvenile fall chinook salmon at Puget Island (26 and 29 May 1966) and Jones Beach Oregon (13-16 June 1966) and corresponding tidal levels during the catch period
19
I 0 tshylt( ()
J
ltt lshy
o I-
ll 0 1-2 lLJ () a ILJ a
10
5
bull bull bull bull
bull -bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull
- ==middot=middotmiddot===---
1966
-=middot ==----middot--0 _T middot1middotbullbullmiddotmiddotbullibullibulli_bull=11=
10
5
0
15
10
5
bullbullbullbull bull bull - bullbull bull bull - ---
1967
= ===-=--== bull ==middot==-middot=middotmiddot=middot= -middotmiddotmiddotmiddot=-middotmiddotbull ========--middotmiddot --middot-middotmiddot---====--===middot=
bullbullbullbullbull bullbull bullbull -- middot-bullbullbull -
= bull ===
=middot
1968
middot= =middot=middotmiddot - --middot-middotmiddotmiddot -middot=-- =middot=middot===--- =--_ middotmiddotmiddot-middot----middotmiddot-middotmiddotmiddot 0 1middot
rmiddotmiddot==middot=----bullra-middot_==-===_=--
10
5
bull bull 1969
-
==middot bull- bull - middot==-=-- - =--=======shy--=
= middotmiddotmiddotmiddotmiddotmiddotmiddotmiddotmiddot---middotmiddotmiddotmiddot--middot-middot 0 1-bullr=middotmiddot=-=middotibullbullbull-bullbull=w=middotbullbullmiddot=imiddotw=u==- I
May I
Jun I
Jul I
Aug I
Sep
10
5
0
10
5
0
10
5
0
- -
1970
-bull bullbull bull
ii - -= ====--=- ==middot -middotmiddotmiddotmiddotmiddotmiddotmiddot -
-middotmiddot
==middot =========middot====-middotmiddot==-middot--middotmiddot===-------middot=middotmiddotmiddot=middotmiddotmiddotmiddotmiddotmiddotmiddotmiddotmiddot=middotmiddot - ---middot ---middot--middot-
1971 - - - bull bull bull
=bull== middotmiddot======= -=-middot- = ====- -===== ====== =-middotmiddotmiddotmiddotmiddotmiddotmiddotmiddotmiddot -middot-middotmiddotmiddotmiddotmiddotmiddotmiddotmiddotmiddotmiddotmiddot --------------==--=
1972
bull
_ -
-- bullbullbull bullaMbullbullabullbullbullbull
middot=- - _- -------=-===
May Jun Jul I
Aug Sep
Figure 7--Temporal
entering catch distribution
the Columbia River of juvenile fall chinook salmon
estuary from 1 May through 1
seine catches at Jones BeachSeptember based on beach
Oregon 1966-1972
20
Fall chinook salmon fry began to enter the Jones Beach area in late February These fish were not actively migrating but were apparently moving out of the smaller tributary streams and utilizing the upper estuary as a rearing area Reimers and Loeffel ( 1967) reported very short residence periods by fall chinook salmon fry in certain tributary streams of the lower Columbia River Based on Jones Beach sampling the total number of fry residing in the estuary is very small in comparison to the total number that migrate
Beach seine catches at Jones Beach from 1966 to 1972 indicate a trend toward later en try of juvenile fall chi nook salmon in to the estuary (Fig 8) o Over the study period the percentage of seaward migrants entering the system during May and June declined whereas the number of fish entering in August increased significantly This apparent shift in the time of migration ls not well defined but may result from variation of seasonal river flows during the study period
The effect of hatchery releases on the timing of the fall chinook salmon migration in the estuary can be seen by comparing the temporal catch distribution in 1971 with that of other years sampled Fig 7) In 1971 almost 90 of the total production of hatchery fall chinook salmon were released prior to 5 May With the exception of a single 5-day period in early May the effect of these early releases on the overall distribution of the migration in the estuary was negligible
Rates of Downstream Movement
Releases of marked fall chinook salmon f ingerlings were made in 1968 1969 and 1970 at hatcheries of the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) Washington Department of Fisheries (WDF) and the US Fish and Wildlife Service ( USFWS) in cooperation with this study Recovery of these marked fish at Jones Beach provided considerable information on passage times and rates of movement of hatchery-reared fall chinook salmon to the estuary Variation in rate of movement of fish from the various hatcheries was considerable (Tables 6 7 and 8) The time required for individual groups to reach Jones Beach ranged from 3 to 24 days Rate of downstream movement varied from 5 to 36 km per day
Ef feet of Size at Release --A -multiple release of branded fall chi nook salmon at Little White Salmon National Fish Hatchery ( USFWS) in 1969 illustrates the effect of size on the rate of downstream movement Three groups of fish (average fork lengths 77 64 and 56 mm respectively) were released at the hatchery (Fig 3 on 24 June 1969 and a fourth group (average fork length 67 mm) was released on 25 June approximately 28 km downstream from the hatchery The relationship of the size of these fish and their rate of downstream movement to the estuary is shown in Figure 9 A strong positive correlation of increased rate of movement with an increase in fish size is evident The largest migrants (77 mm) moved 12 km per day faster than the smallest ( 56 mm
21
N
N
Table 6-- Rate of downstream movement of various groups of marked hatchery fall chinook salmon based on beach seine catches at Jones Beach Oregon 1968
Release information
Hatchery of origin
Ringold (WDF) 3 Ringold
Kalama (WDF) Kalama Washougal (WDF)middot Washougal Washougal Washougal
Spring Creek (FWS) Abernathy (FWS) Abernathy Little White Salmon
(FWS) Little White Salmon Little White Salmon
Little White Salmon
Little White Salmon Little White Salmon Oxbow (ODFW) 5 Oxbow
Bonneville (ODFW)
Place
Hatchery Below Bonneshyville Dam Hatchery Hatchery Hatchery Hatchery Camas Slough Below Camas Slough Hatchery Hatchery Hatchery Cook Wa
Dranmiddoto Lake Below Bonneshyville Dam Mouth of Willamette R Prescott Or Beaver Or Hatchery Below Bonneshyville Dam Hatchery
a Washington Department of Fisheries
Fish and Wildlife Service
Date
14 May 16 May
17 June 12middot July 17 June 17 June 17 June 17 June
13 June 15 May 15 May 22 June
22 June 24 June
25 June
26 June 27 June 4 June
5 June
17 June
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife
Number of fish
90000 90000
78850 80000 77900 78700 76500 77700
159000 200300 200400 217200
107500 101700
102000
99700 192700 128000 110000
116300
Number of fish
7 144
62 73 97
101 144 237
80 2276
559 402
295 558
551
505 1170
64 116
63
Recovery information
Distance traveled
(km)
490 162
46 46
132 132 liO
115
192 15 15
190
188 162
91
36 14
171 162
162
Travel time (days)
150 81
87 64
114110
9 291
93 31 30 93
109 86
7 4
57 25 7 552
81
Rate of movement (kmday)
327 200
53 72
116 120 125 131
2Q6 48 50
204
172 188
123
63 56
228 311
201
N
Table 7-- Rate of downstream movemen t of various groups of marked hatchery fall chinook salmon based on beach seine catches at Jones Beach Oregon 1969
Hatchery of origin
Ringold Ringold
Oxbow
Oxbow
Oxbow
Oxbow Spring Creek Little White Salmon Little White Salmon Little White Salmon
Little White Salmon Little White Salmon
Release
Place
Hatchery Below Bonne-ville Dam Below Bonne-ville Dam Below Bonne-ville Dam Below Bonn e-ville Dam Rainier Or Hatchery Hatchery Hatchery Below Bonne-ville Dam Hatchery Rainier Or
information
Date
12 May 16 May
19 May
19 May
19 May
20 May 3 June
24 June 24 June 25 June
24 June 27 June
Recovery i nformation
Distan ce Travel Rate of Number Number traveled time movemen t of fish recovered (km) (days) (kmday)
201200 60 490 143 343 66800 75 162 46 352
152000 481 162 62 261
151100 1271 162 59 275
154800 395 162 59 275
155900 485 36 25 144 199700 417 190 54 356 198500 252 190 130 146 196800 215 190 70 271
76000 148 162 69 235
114800 156 83 229 41300 228
190 36 43 84
N
Table 8-- Rate of downstream movement of various groups of marked hatchery fall chinook middot salmon based on beach seine catches at Jones Beach Oregon 1970
Release information Recovery information
Distance ravel Rate of
Hatchery of origin Place Date Number Number traveled time movement of fish recovered (km) (days) (kmday)
Spring Creek Hatchery 14 April 152500 1441 192 238 81 Spring Creek Hatchery 22 June 144600 131 192 88 21 8 Spring Creek Hatchery 22 June 152100 284 192 87 221 Oxbow Below Bonne- 15 May 75700 85 162 73 222
ville Dam Oxbow Below Bonne- 15 May 75000 55 162 68 238
ville Dam Little White Salmon Hatchery 22 June 183900 646 190 105 181 Little White Salmon Hatchery 22 June 187000 914 190 138 138 Little White Salmon Below Bonne- 23 June 15 6middot 000 594 162 82 1middot9 8
ville Dam
50
40
30
20
10
0
30
c
20 ()
10
0
LL 50
40
30 ()
20Q
10
0
40
30
20
10
0 1966 1967
MAY
JUNE
JULY
AUGUST
1968 1969 1970 1971 1972
YEAR
Figure 8--Annual variation in the migrational timing of juvenile fall chinook
salmon at Jones Beach Oregon 1966-1972
25
N deg
-
E E -
z w _J
0
z
lt( w
a
80
70
60
50
0 5
Y=305X-I050
r = 093
10 15 20
RATE OF MOVEMENT kmday)
bull
25 30
Figure 9--Relationship of size at release and rate of downstream movement to the estuary of four size groups of branded fall chinook salmon released from Little White Salmon Hatchery on 24-25 June 1969
Effect of Release Loca tion--Mark recovery data also indicated that the rate of downstream movement of hatchery juvenile chinook salmon may be associated with point of release (Fig 10) Fish reared and released from hatcheries near the estuary moved downstream at a slower rate than those from hatcheries farther upstream For example fall chinook salmon from Abernathy Hatchery (USFWS) about 15 km above the Jones Beach sampling site moved downstream at an average rate of about 5 km per day whereas fish released at Ringold (WDF) 490 km above the estuary moved downstream at almost 33 km per day (Table 6)
Effect of River Flow--Raytnond (1968) showed a positive correlation between water flow and rate of downstream movement of yearling chinook salmon in upper Columbia and Snake Rivers A similar correlation is difficult to demonstrate in relation to juvenile fall chinook salmon in the lower Columbia River Releases of marked fall chinook salmon of comparable body lengths at two Federal hatcheries (Little White Salmon and Spring Creek) failed to show a clear relationship be tween river flow and rate of downstream movement ( Table 9) This is probably the result of variations in the number of smolting fish within the release groups Some groups of fish released during periods of high river flow moved downstream at a slower rate than other groups released during lower river flows If all fish were actively migrating seaward at the time of release the effect of river flow on downstream movement might be more evident (samples from later years suggested a relationship)
Size and Estuarine Residency
Fork-length measurement s were taken each year from May to September to examine size characteristics of juvenile fall chinook salmon in the estuary Mean fork-lengths of juveniles entering the estuarine system at Jones Beach from 1966 to 1972 are shown in Figure 11 Average sizes of fall chinook salmon entering (Jones Beach) and leaving (Clatsop Spit) the estuary are compared in Figure 12 These relationships show that the average length of fall chinook salmon in the estuary approaches 75 mm by mid- to late-May each year and does not increase significantly until late July
There are two hypotheses that would account for the constant size of juvenile fall chinook salmon in the estuary over such an extended period (1) growth rate of fall chinook salmon rearing in the estuary is substantially reduced or ( 2) juvenile fall chinook salmon rear to smol ting size in areas above the estuary and pass quickly through the estuary once they enter the system Reimers (1973) reported a similar size pattern for fall chinook salmon in the Sixes River estuary in southern Oregon and related this pattern to decreased growth rates during an extended period of estuarine residence He further hypothesized that this reduction in growth rate resulted in high population densities in the estuary during this period
Mark recoveries during this study suggest that the majority of juvenile fall chinook salmon entering the Columbia River estuary remain within the system for a relatively short period of time Recoveries from 16 groups of marked hatchery fall chinook salmon in 1970 showed that these fish began to
27
Table 9 -- Rate of downstream movement and avera ge river flo at time of release of six groups of similatmiddot sized marked fall chinook salmon released into the Columbia River during 1968 1969 and 1970
Number Number Hatchery and Average rate year of of fish Date of of marks of movement er flow a
middot releasmiddote released release recovered (kmday) (m s x 1000)
Sp ring Creek
1968 159000 -13 June 80 206 1969 199716 3 June 417 356 1970 152079 22 June 284 221
Little White Sal1D0n
1968 217000 22 June 402 204 1969 196800 24 June 215 271 1970 186950 22 June 914 18l
a Average daily flow at Bonneville Dam for 20-day period after release Flow data from Annual Fish Passage Reports 1969-70 North Pacific Division US Army Corps of Engineers processed report
28
106 10l
79
98
84
79
J
oo
(J)
lt( i
150wl
a I )shylt(
r ()
100 CX)
(J) w
z 0
50 a LL
E
bullbull
bull
r =094
bull bull bull
bull
Y = I l27X -3358
0----r---------r-------0 5 10 15 20 25
RATE OF MOVEMENT (kmday)
Figure 10--Relationship of distance from the estuary at release to rate of downstream movement of 12 groups of branded fall chinook salmon released from various hatcheries on the Columbia River in May and June 1968
29
100
75
50 100
75
50 100
-
E 75 E -
I 50 I-
100 ()
z
75
0 50
100 z
lt( 75 w
E
50 100
75
50 100
75
50
1 15
MAY
1 15
JUNE
1 15
JULY
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
(972
1 15
AUG
1
SEPT
Figure 11--Mean fork-length of juvenile fall chinook salmon captured with beach seines at Jones Beach Oregon 1966-1972
30
125 -
E E100 -
75 z IJI _J
50
25 z
ltt lLJ
0 E
---------
20 25
MAY
1
-
--- SITE A-1 (Clatsop Spit) - SITE J-1 (Jones Beach)
5 10 15 20 25 1
JUNE
----
5 10- 15
JULY
Figure 12--Mean fork-length of juvenile fall chinook salmon in the upper
(Site J-1) and lower (Site A-1) Columbia River estuary
20 May-15 July 1970
31
leave the estuary within 6 days or less after entering the estuary (Table 10) In addition five branded fall chinook salmon fingerlings were taken by purse seine in the ocean several-miles south of the river mouth in 1969 Two of these fish had been released 14 km above the Jones Beach site only 6 days earlier The other three fish had been released at the same site from 9 to 15 days earlier Al though few in number these ocean recoveries further suggest a rapid movement of juvenile fall chinook salmon through the estuary
Additional mark recoveries indicate that when fall chinook salmon stay in the estuary foran extended period their size increases rapidly Recoveries from six groups of marked fall chinook salmon fingerlings transported from the Washougal Hatchery (WDF) and released at six separate locations in the lower river 16-18 June 1969 showed that the behavior of these fish was different from that of any other groups of marked fish sampled during this study These fish were small when released (approximately 200lb) and obviously not ready to migrate They began to enter the beach seine catches at Jones Beach on 21 June and significant numbers were still being caught in mid-September Recovery rates from the Washougal releases were 10 times greater than for any other groups of marked fish Moreover 10 times as many multiple mark recaptures were made Many individual fish from these releases were caught four and five times during a IO-week period Inasmuch as these fish remained in the estuary for a substantial period of time their growth rate during this time is a valid indication of growth during residency in the estuary Average size of these fish increased rapidly during their estuarine residence whereas the average size of all other groups of fish taken at Jones Beach during the same time period remained relatively constant (Fig 13)
The evidence supports the conclusion that in the Columbia River the majority of fall chinook salmon finger lings remain in the estuary for a relatively short period and that they reside in the main river or tributaries upstream from the estuary until they reach a size range of about 7 to 8 cm This would account for the similar ty in size range of fall chinook salmon entering the estuary during the late spring and early summer The rapid increase in the size of fish entering the estuary after mid-July is probably due to improved conditions ( such as warmer water tempera tu res) for growth in the upriver rearing areas
Relative Survival of Hatchery Fall Chinook Salmon
Ebel (1970) reported a significant increase in survival of hatchery fall chinook salmon finger lings transported from an upriver hatchery and released below Bonneville Dam over survivals from conventional releases at the hatchery
Estimates of relative survival during passage to the estuary of hatchery fall chinook salmon released at various points in the river from 1968 to 1970 are shown in Tables 11 12 and 13 In each instance the relative survival was increased by transporting the fish to a point below Bonneville Dam for release Relative survival rates of seven experimental groups of branded fall chinook salmon released below Bonneville Dam are compared to a duplicate
32
Table 10-- Passage time of 16 groups of marked hatchery fall chinook salmon from Jones Beach to Clatsop Spit gt Oregon (74 km) 1970
Hatchery of origin
Oxbow Oxbow Oxbow Oxbow Spring Creek Spring Creek Spring Creek Spring Creek Little White Salmon Little White Salmon Little White Salmon Little White Salmon Little White Salmon Little White Salmon Little White Salmon Little White Salmon
Date of first arrival at
Jones Beach
18 May 18 May 20 May 23 May
25 June 25 June 25 June 27 June 25 June 26 june 25 June 25 Jt1ne 26 June 26 June 28 June 28 June
Date of first arrival at Passage time Clatsop Spit (days)
22 May 4
22 May 4
26 May 6 27 May 4
29 June middot4
29 June 4
28 June 330 June 3
middot29 June 4
28 June 2
28 June 3
1 July 6 2 July 6
JOJune middot4
29 June 1
30 June 2
33
Table 11-- Recovery rate and relative survival of branded groups of hatchery fall chinook salmon at Jones Beach Oregon 1968
Relative Hatchery of origin middot Size at Release Recovery survivalmiddot and release point release date rate () rate ()
Little White a Salmon -
Hatchery 110lb 22 June 027 45 Below Bonneville Dam 107lb 24 June 056 93 Beaver Oregon 103lb 27 June 060 100
Oxbow
Hatchery 72lb 4 June 005 45 Below Bonneville Dam 72lb 5 June 011 100
Ringold
Hatchery 62lb 14 May 001 middot Below Bonneville Dam 62lb 16 May 016 100
a Data reported by Ebel (1970)
34
Table 12-- Recovery rate and reiative survival of branded groups of hatchery fall chinook salmon at Jones Bea ch Oregon 1969
Size at Relative Hatchery of origin release Release Recovery survival and point of release (no lb date rate() rate ()
Little White Salmon
Hatchery 109 24 June 013 57 Below Bonneville Dam 109 25 June 020 87 Rainier Oregon 109 27 June 023 100
Oxbow
Bonneville Spillway 85 19 May 031 38 Below Bonneville Dam 85 19 May 029 35 Rainier Oregon 85 20 May 082 100
Ringold
Hatchery 65 12 May 002 18 Below Bonneville Dam 65 16 May 011 100
35
Table 13-- Recovery rate and relative survival of branded groups of hatchery
Hatchery of origin Size at and release point release
Little White Salmon
Group 1
Hatchery 65lb Below Bonneville Dam 69lb Rainier Oregon 69lb
Group 2
Hatchery 110lb Below Bonneville Dam 126lb Rainier Oregon 126lb
Spring Creek
Group 1
Hatchery 109lb Rainier Oregon 92lb
Group 2
Hatchery 43lb Rainier Oregon 39lb
Group 3
Hatchery 67lb Rainier Oregon 68lb
Release date
22 June 23 June 25 June
22 June 23 June 27 June
14 April
Recovery rate ()
035 038
087
049 059 074
094 20-21 April 103
22 June 009 24-26 June 029middot
22 June 019 24-26 June 022
36
Relative survival rate ()
40
44
100
66 80
100
91 100
31
100
86 100
80
-
75 bull
70 bull
65
60 20 25
JUNE
5
0
bull
-------------------
bull bull
bull
Washougal fish Y=0595X + 6573 bull
Unmarked fish Y=005X + 7080
1
DATE
II
DAYS
o----
5 JULY
15
10 15
20 25
Figure 13--Size comparison of branded Washougal Hatchery fall chinook salmon and the unmarked fall chinook salmon catch at Jones Beach Oregon 20 June-15 July 1969
37
hatchery release in Table 14 The increase in survival of transported fish over those released at the hatchery ranged from 4 to 96 Transporting fish from Ringold Ponds (490 km from river mouth) for release below Bonneville Dam resulted in survival increases of 96 in 1968 and 73 in 1969 Transporting fish below the dam from hatcheries located on the Bonneville pool ( 160 to 192 km from the river mouth) increased survival by 51 in 1968 and 30 in 1969
Conclusions
1 Juvenile fall chinook salmon concentrate in shallow near-shore areasof the estuary and when in deep water areas are generally found within 3 m of the surface
2 Most movement of juvenile fall chinook salmon through the estuaryoccurs during daytime
3 Tidal conditions or direction of flow does not appear to influencediel movement patterns of juvenile fall chinook salmon in the estuary
4 Timing of the juvenile fall chinook salmon migration into the estuary is generally bimodal characterized by an early peak in May and early June followed by a general decline later in June and a second usually larger peak in July or August
5 A trend toward later entry of juvenile fall chinook salmon into theestuary was noted During the period of this study the percentage of fish entering the estua ry in May and June declined whereas portions entering in August increased significantly
6 The early release of hatchery fall chinook salmon in 1971 had littleaffect on temporal distribution of the overall outmigration through the estuary
7 Larger fall chinook salmon migrants generally move downstream at afaster rate than smaller fish
8 Juvenile fall chinook salmon released from hatcheries near theestuary generally move downstream at a slower rate than those released from hatcheries more distant from the estuary
9 Average sizes ( 7 to 8 cm) of juvenile fall chinook salmon enteringthe estuary remain relatively constant from mid-May to late July
10 The majority of juvenile fall chinook salmon rear to smol ting sizein the river areas above the estuary
11 Most juvenile fall chinook salmon migrate rapidly through theestuary
38
w 0
Table 14-- Increases in survival of juvenile hatchery reared fall chinook salmon resulting from transportshying fish to release sites below Bonneville Dam 1968-70
Hatchery of origin
Little White Salmon
Oxbow Ringold
Size of fish
107lb
72lb 62lb
1968
Increased survival Size
() of fish
48 109lb
55 96 65lb
1969 1970
Increased Increased survival Size survival
() of fish ()
30 69lb 4 126lb 14
73
12 Transporting juvenile fall chinook salmon from hatcheries aboveBonneville Dam to release sites below the dam increases fingerling survival to the estuary Generally fish transported rom more distant rearing areas show greater survival benefits than those transported from hatcheries nearer the estuary
40
SECTION II--COHO SALMON 1966-1971
Introduction-
The coho salmon is an important commercial and recreational speciesin the Columbia River and its tributaries for spawning and presmoltrearing Drawing from several sources Pruter (1966) devised a table whichshowed the annual average coho salmon landings in terms of pounds from1893 to 1963 The peak landings of coho salmon occurred between 1921 and1930 with an average of 6000000 pounds (2722000 kg) taken annuallyLandings decreased progress vely until 1956-60 when an average of only300000 pounds (136000 kg) were taken Assuming an approximate averageweight of 10 lb (45
kg) per fish coho salmon landings were reduced from
600000 to 30000 fish
Many factors together with the commercial harvest affected theColumbia River coho salmon stocks Silt-choked gravel beds and log jams instreams from early forest harvesting reduced the spawning areas and limitedfood production during the rearing period Low head hydroelectric damsimpaired adult and juvenile migrations directly and indirectly whereassome multipurpose high head storage dams completely blocked adult spawningmigrations Commercial trolling and recreational ocean fishing contributedto losses since many immature sublegal fish are caught and mortallyinjured before being released (Parker et al 1959 Milne and Ball 1956)Additional causes for the decline in the number of coho salmon includemunicipal and industrial pollution pesticide usage nitrogensupersaturation and hydrothermal conditions Despite these negativefactors the decline in coho salmon numbers was reversed in the early1960s The run has subsequently averaged 265000 fish landed from 1964
to
1974 with a high of 521000 in 1970 and a low of 125000 fish in 1968
An improved hatchery diet which sustained the juvenile fish untiltheir yearling migration is credited as the single most important factor inthe improved coho salmon runs Cleaver (1969b) determined the benefitsfrom various coho hatcheries in the Columbia River system appeared to bewell in excess of their cos ts Haw and Ma thews (19 69) reported that thetechnological advances in the rearing of coho salmon resulted in returnsfar exceeding the rearing capacity of the hatcheries
Since the early 1960s the number of coho salmon returning to
natuhatcheries
ral spawnihas
ng trincreased
ibutaries has substantially
decreased while
according their
to presence
tables in prepared
selecteby
dGunsolus and Wendler (1975) Pollution control restricted use ofmiddotpesticides improved forest harvesting techniques updated designs for fishpassage facilities at dams and reduction in supersatuation of dissolvedatmospheric gas in the water downstream from dams are all continuingimproveHowever
mentswhile
thatcoho
shouldsalmon
rehave
sult in increased
increased numerically
survivalfrom
oftheir
coholow
salmonpoint
in the 1950s they have not reached the magnitude of earlier runs Onepossibility for the apparent leveling of f of the coho resurgence might beattributed to problems encountered by smolts during their migration to thesea This section presents data collected from 1966 through 1971 on_juvenile coho salmon migrations
41
Methods
Beach seines were used to capture samples of juvenile coho salmon in the Columbia River A detailed description of the net and technique used to make sets is given by Sims and Johnsen (1974)
Sampling sites for the study are shown in Figure 14 The locations varied during 1966 and 1967 but from 1968 through 1971 the primary site was at Jones Beach Sites at nearby Puget Island and Cape Horn Beach on the Washington shore were sampled frequently during the first 3 years of the study (Table 15) Seining at those locations consistently resulted in a smaller catch per set than at Jones Beach Size range species composition and other catch characteristics were similar at all sites
Until April 1968 the seine crew examined and recorded their catch Beginning in May 1968 a separate crew was used to process fish and record data In both situations all juvenile salmon and trout were anesthetized with MS-222 (tricaine methanesulfonate) identified enumerated by species and examined for marks individuals from a subsample were measured for fork length Fish were held until they completely recovered from the anesthetic and then were returned to the river Use of a separate processing crew resulted in a greater number of sets being made at a site and reduced the time that the fish were held under stress
Juvenile coho salmon were also taken by purse seining in the navigation channel of the river adjacent to Jones Beach (Johnsen and Sims 1973) Purse seining effort was consistent for only 2 years in the area and for that reason little information from that ef fort is included in this report Coho salmon data from purse seine catches were in agreement with those from the beach seine catches
Results and Discussion
Annual and Monthly Catches
Juvenile coho salmon are abundant in the Columbia River estuary from mid-April to early June and are present in small numbers through the remainder of the year Beach seining captured 110421 juvenile coho between 1966 and 1971 Monthly and annual catches are presented in Table 16 Our largest annual catch was in 1970 when 45146 fish were caught andthe least was in 1967 when we took only 5792 coho salmon Samplingeffort in seine sets per month provides a basis for annual comparisonbut caution is advised in interpreting these results Catch alone shouldnot be construed as an annual index of abundance Major considerations inthis study are the variation in seine sites in 1966 and 1967 and thefrequency of seine sets during the period of maximum availability Monthlyaverages show that most coho salmon were caught in May followed by Apriland June in that order The large monthly catch in August 1969 was a
42
z
ltt
IJI
0
0
0
lL
0
-tt
a
bull middot 0 10 20 I I I J 1
Kilometers
N
Sampling Sites I Jones Beach2 West Puget I3 Cape Horn Beach
middot - 4 Westport Beachmiddot
5 East Puget I6 Wauna7 Brad wood 8 Unnamed Sand Spit-middot-middotmiddotmiddotmiddotmiddotmiddotmiddotmiddot-middot
0 R E G O N
middot -middot middot-middotmiddot middot
Figure 14 --Map of lower Columbia River with inset showing location of sampling sites used in the upper estuary between 1966 and 1971
43
Table
Year
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
15- -Sampli ng effort in the upper Columbia River estuary April through June 1966-71
Principal Secondary No of sampling sampling work
sites sites shifts
West Puget Is Westport Beach 2 Jones Beach Unnamed Sand Spit
West Puget Is East Puget Is 2 Jones Beach Bradwood Beach
Westport Beach Wuana Cape Horn Beach
Jones Beach West Puget Is 2
Cape Horn Beach East Puget Is
Jones Beach Cape Horn Beach 1
Jones Beach Cape Horn Beach 2
Jones Beach None 1
44
Daily sampling
period
0800-1600
0800-1600
(0800-1600
Sampling days
per week
5
5
until mid-May) 5
(0500-1100 after mid-May) 7
(0800-1600 until mid-May) 5
(0500-1100 after mid-May) 7
0500-1200 7 1300-2000
0500-1200 5
Sets per day
3 to 10
3 to 10
9
9
12
12
24
12
Table 16--Results of bench seine snmpltng for juvenile coho Ralmon in the Columhta River estuary 1966
19(6 1967 1968 I 969 1970 No No No No No No No No No No
Month sets coho CPS sets 1middotoho CPS sets coho crs S(tll coho ClS RttI coho crs
Jan 4 0 oo 19 0 oo
Feb so oo 12 o 1 31 3 01
Har 66 0 oo 92 14 02 69 78 middot I I 60 3 01
Apr 217 3547 163 104 271 26 227 1831 8 I 165 4831 29 3 386 91126 25S
May 320 3851 120 104 5283 soa 372 6172 166 320 18973 59 3 673 34771 517
Jun 398 86 02 405 185 os 525 255 os 637 1 114 17 674 510 011
Jul 83 7 01 315 37 01 589 68 01 697 79 01 597 29 oo
Aug 17 01 214 oo 406 4745 tl6 178 10 01
Sep 163 67 04
Oct 711 27 03
Nov II J oJ 48 25 os 33 0 oo
Dec 9 38 42 34 4 o l 12 0 oo
---- ---- ----- ------ ---------
Total 1104 7532 68 1087 5792 SJ 2094 8435 4o 2 21 29842 114 2508 45146 180
CPSbull catch per set
1971
No No
RrtR coho ClS
110 3017 3 7 7
I 611 104114 624
210 Jiff CIS
1117 55 0 3
----
675 13674 203
result of a large release of hatchery fish (subyearling coho salmon) in late July by the Washington Department of Fisheries into the Columbia River above our sampling site With this exception our catch records show consistently high captures relative to expended ef fort in the spring of each year but relatively insignificant numbers during winter summer and fall
Timing of Annual Migration
The annual peak in the daily catch per set (CPS) of coho salmon (averages of all seine sets in that day) occurred within a 12-day period over the 6-year study (Fig 15) Peak CPS occurred in the upper estuary of the Columbia River between 5 and 16 May of each year 10 May most likely approximates the average as all annual peaks occurred within 6 days before or after this date
The date of peak migration may be determined on a basis other than CPS Figure 16 shows daily total catches in percentages of the annual total catch Less than 5 of the coho salmon reached the estuary before 17 April Each year the midpoint of the migration was reached between 2 and 13 May The yearling smolt migration was 95 complete between 19 and 31 May Thus both the daily percentage of the total CPS and the average daily catch indicated that the annual migration of coho salmon smolts in the Columbia River was compact consistent and comparable through te 6-year investigation
The chronological similarity of annual peak catches in the upper estuary is particularly interesting since many widely separated hatcheries and tributaries contribute to the total migration Fulton (1970) listed 39 Columbia River streams and 62 of their tributaries that now have or have had spawning runs of coho salmon He also reported that 78 of these presently have spawning areas More important numerically are coho salmon reared at as many as 19 different Columbia River hatcheries though not all of these hatcheries produce coho salmon every year Considering the number of diverse systems contributing to the migration and differences in river discharge between years it is remarkable that coho salmon smolt migrations into the estuary were so consistent in their timing
The timing of migrations of juvenile coho salmon coincides with movement reported in other widely separate geographic areas Shapovalov and Taft (1954) presented tables showing that the peak migration of juvenile coho salmon occurred from 6 to 12 May during a 9-year study of Waddell Creek California Chamberlain (1907) reported a heavy migration of yearling coho salmon into seawater in May of 1903 and 1904 in southeastern Alaska Peck (1970) found that most coho salmon smolts left a Lake Superior tributary within a week of planting on 16 and 17 May Salo (1955) reported the peak seaward migration of juvenile coho salmon in Minter Creek a tributary of Puget Sound in Washington occurred in early May
46
200
100
0
300
200
100 -
0
a 200
100
-
c 0 ()
300
Lu 200
100
200
100
0
200
100
0
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
10 20 30 MARCH
10 20 30 APRIL
10 20 30 MAY
10 20 30
JUNE
Figure 15 --Average daily beach seine catches of juvenile coho salmon at sites in the upper Columbia River estuary (1966-71)
47
r-0)
100
c u
90
_J 80 lt( gt z
z 70 lt(
60
w
50
w u
40
w 30 gt
f-20 lt(
_J gt
10 gt
II 21
MARCH
5
31
95
I = I i j l bull I I jJ
middotr 1 lr1 bull I I
r I I Imiddot
bull I
10 20 30 10 20 30
APRIL MAY
__ 1966
----- 1967
-middot-middot 1968-- 969
-- 1970
bullbullbullbullbullbullbull 19 71
9 middot 19JUNE
29 9 19 JULY
Figure 16 --Daily total seine catch of juvenile coho salmon in the upper Columbia River estuary (expressed in percentage of the annual catch) 1966-71
Hartman et al (1967) compared timing of sockeye salmon O nerka smolts with the latitude of their nursery areas and determined photoperiodism to be an overriding stimulus for downstream migration Such a relation for coho salmon smolts is not apparent because their migration seems to occur at a similar time irrespective of latitude
Water temperature may be a factor that influences the timing and movement rate of coho smolts (Fig 17) During the study water temperatures would generally rise from approximately 10 deg C in early Aprilto 16 deg-18 deg C in late June Temperatures at peak migrations ranged from 113 deg C (1970) to 14 7 deg C (1967) Water temperatures in 1969 generallylagged behind those in other study years coincidently progression of the smolt migration in that year was somewhat later than in other years of this study (Fig 16) The relation of temperature to timing of migration however is not precise and can only be suggested
No consistent relation was found between flow volume of the Columbia River and timing of juvenile coho salmon (Fig 17) In 1966 1969 and 1971 the period of peak arrival of coho generally corresponded with increasing river flows In 1967 1968 and 1970 however increased river flows began after the migratory peak had passed Recovery of marked coho salmon released from Cowlitz Hatchery in 1969 1970 and 1971 indicated a variation in rate of movement of only 2 km per day for seven separate groups of coho salmon It appears therefore that since the timing of the coho salmon migration was generally consistent over the study period and the volume of river flow was substantially different during the 6-year investigative period timing of the migration is not dependent upon volume of river flow
The possibility that the time of release of coho salmon from the various hatcheries influenced the time of peak migration into the estuary also was examined Timing of releases from the 19 coho salmon hatcheries varied considerably within and between years Major releases ranged from January to May March was the principal month for juvenile releases in 1966 and 1967 whereas the major releases from 1968 to 1971 were in April Based on recoveries at Jones Beach early release of coho salmon from the hatcheries failed to result in a correspondingly early seaward migration For this reason the March to May release time suggested by Wallis (1968) for hatchery coho salmon might be modified to a mid-April to May schedule if direct seaward migration is desired
Zaugg (1970) discussed the migratory timing of juvenile coho salmon in several Pacific Northwest streams and found a corresponding seasonal change in gill Na+-K+ ATPase He interpreted increases of Na+-K+ ATPase (in late March) as an indication of biological readiness for seawater and decreases (July) as indicative of a loss of urge to move seaward The timing data from our catches of yearling coho salmon entering the Columbia River estuary are generally in agreement with this observation However subyearling coho salmon reared in a hatchery and released in late July also moved toward the estuary in large numbers On 28 July 1969 the Washington
49
15 1966 20
10
5
0
20
1967 15 0
10
5
0
-
15 1968 en
1 0 E
0 5
C
0 0
15 c
1969 -
10
== 0
5 _ ---
0 0 IJJ
gt 151970
a 10
5
0
15 1971
10
5
0
Flow volume Temperature Peak catch
-
0
--middotmiddot----_ -middot
0
__ _ ___ __
_ --
-middot -middot - middot-----middot -middot -middotmiddot
----middot middotmiddot-
0
-- ---- J-----
15
10
5
0
20
15
10
5
0
20 -
15 deg 0
10 -
l1J
=gt 0 I-
20 0
w
15 a
10 l1J
5
0 0
IJJ
I-
20 ltt
15
10
5
0
20
15
10
5
10 20 30 10 20 30 10 20 30 10 20 30 MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
Figure 17--Columbia River flows (US Geological Survey 1965-1971) water temperatures at Jones Beach and dates of peak catch for the spring migration 1966-1971
50
Department of Fisheries released 742218 subyearling coho salmon at Rainier Oregon 28 km above Jones Beachmiddotmiddot We captured 4817 of these fish during the following few weeks (although they were not marked individuals from this group were easily identified from size and dates of recovery) The fish averaged 80 mm in length and were from 50 to 100 mm long Since these fish were not marked and were released directly into the Columbia River evaluation of adult contribution to the fisheries was not possible
Since many hatchery releases of yearling coho salmon made before mid-April apparently did not move directly and rapidly to the estuary their behavior during the interim period is of interest Chapman (1962) found that aggressive behavior caused some wild coho salmon (ie nonhatchery fish) in small streams to migrate downstream early Chapman (1965) also noted that relatively large freshets in small streams caused downstream movement of wild coho salmon Continuance of such movement to the estuary was not indicated at Jones Beach We did learn that some hatchery reared coho salmon released before May in tributary streams downstream from Jones Beach moved upstream Recovery of these marked fish at Jones Beach is shown in Table 17 Unfortunately there were no distinctively marked fish released after 1 May below Jones Beach Jones Beach is from 10 to 80 km upstream from the indicated release sites of the hatcheries No marked coho salmon were released below our sampling sites in 1966 but from 1967 through 1970 marked fish were released in the lower area and upstream movement was indicated each year Although coho salmon were released in the lower estuary in 1971 no assessment was made since the only fin-clip release made below our site also coincided with similarly marked coho salmon released upstream
Rates of Movement
Many groups of juvenile coho salmon were marked and released at various state and federal hatcheries during this study Average rates of movement to the estuary based on distance traveled and time of release have been determined from the analysis of recovery data at the Jones Beach sampling site (Table 18) Releases of identifiable fish ranged from about 63000 to 742000 fish The largest release was the group of unmarked subyearling coho salmon from Lower Kalama Hatchery of the Washington Department of Fisheries Their distinctive size and time of release in late July 1969 made it possible to readily identify these fish upon recovery Recoveries of groups of marked fish ranged from 5 to 4817 individuals Average travel time to Jones Beach among the 24 specific groups ranged from 3 to 81 days Average rate of travel ranged from 3 to 26 km per day Rate of movement was associated with distance traveled Generally we found that coho salmon released above Bonneville Dam moved more rapidly than those released at sites below the dam In an unusual example of travel rate over an extended distance Witty (1966) found juvenile coho salmon moved from the Wallowa River to Bonneville Dam (about 700 km) at an average rate of 713 km per day
51
Table 17 --Releases and recoveries of marked coho salmon yearlings moving upstream to Jones Beach
Km from Jones Beach
(approx) Release date
75 23 April 1967
75 23 April 1967
75 23 April 1967 20 1 January 1967
35 27 February 1968 80 7 March 1968 75 15 April 1968 20 16 April 1968
10 14 April 1969
35 15 April 1969
35 15 March 1970 75 2 April 1970
Hatchery and release pointal
Grays River-WDF
Grays River-WDF
Elochoman-WDF Grays Ri ver-WDF
Big Creek-ODFW Clatskanine-ODFW Grays Rive r-WDF Elochoman-WDF
Cathlamet-Trans from Cowlitz-WDF
Big Creek-ODFW
Big Creek-ODFW Grays River-WDF
Youngs Bay-Trans 60 23 29 April 1970 from Little White Salmon-FWS
No marked fish Released Recovered
35068 1
36344 1
107227 18 118365
123343 69 113316 69
63150 69 88515 69
314639 9
80957 121
73920 123 232081 123
100662 13
Type of finclip marill
D-LV
D-RV
AD-RM
AD-RM
AD-LP
AD and wire tag
AD
LV
a WDF designates Washington Department of Fisheries ODFW the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildli fe and F WS the US Fish and Wildli fe Service
b AD designates that the adipose fin was removed D the dorsal fin RM the right maxillary bone LP left pectoral fin LV left ventral fin RV the right ventral fin
52
V w
Table R--Rate of movement (from area of rrlease to the Jones Reach sampling site) for various releases of marked hatchery-reared 1uvenile coho s1lmon 1967-71
Origin of stock
Leavenworth FWS Ringold Ponds IWF Ice Harbor NMFS Ice Harbor NlIFS Little White FWS Cascade OOFW Cascade OOFW Leavenworth FlvS
(Trans to Ronn Dam) Cascade ODFW
(Trans To Tanner Cr) Eap le Creek FWS Sandy River OlgtFW RinPold Ponds WOF
(Trans to Washougal) Washougal WUF Washougal WllF Cowlftz WDF Cowl I tz WDF Cowlitz WIJF Cowlitz WllF Cowl tz WllF Cowlitz WVF Cowlitz WVF Kalama WlgtF
(Trilns to Rainlrr OR) Ahernthy FWS
Km to Jones Reich M1rk
Release d1tc
730 490 li61 46 190 166 166 162
162
lliO 138 132
132 132 )JO 10 I JO 110 l JO1011036
28
0-AD 3167 LV-UI 324-2770 BRAND 324-51567 RRANO 328-5168 RV 51270 12 D-LP 4571 12 D-P 4571 D-AD-1N 31068
RV-RM
AN D-LMLV-RM
RV LV AO-RV AO-LV AD-LV AO-RV AD-RP AO-LP 0 J
AD
32971
4168 220-21i67 41470
4971 4971 41469 41569 4670 li670 4 171 4171 4171 72869
52869
Rate of No No recovrry
re leiscd recovered pr r IO 000
200000 80215
613 123 50580 100367
IIR000 81000 97000
100000
87000 171435 63293
87R76 87824
335681 348754 285000 326000 303365 266695 302695 742218
78000
5
6 90
152 I I 2 41 36 I
28
39 19 93
65 Ii]
30l 422 t2R 527
63 117
89 4Rl7
1540
025 075 140 300
I I 16 466 444 423
2RO
4tRI 11
ll69
7 40 535 9 IR
121015021617208439294
6190
19744
Aver11rr no days to
Jones Deach
81 22 26 29 12 36 Ji SJ
37
46 40
5
26 26 32 22 27 31 37 34 37 7
3
Movcmltnt ratlt km dy
90 200 I 7 7 157
1 s 8 46 47 31
44
JOJ 5
264
5 I5 I35 50 40 J5 30 32 30 5 I
9J
_ FWS designates the US Fish and WlldH fe Service WDF the Washinnton Department of Fisheries NMFS the National Marine Fisheries Service and ODFW the Oreron Department of Fish and Wildlife
I Not marked but readily identifiable because of small size (0-age) All other releases were yearling fish
Time of release was another factor influencing the movement rate Releases of a single stock of marked juvenile coho salmon made in the spring over a 2-month period at Ice Harbor Dam in 1967 and 1968 provided examples of changing rates of movement in relation to time of release Subsequent recovery of these fish at Jones Beach enabled determinations of travel time Scientists studying the effects of turbines on salmon smolts released 643123 marked juvenile coho salmon during an 8-week period in 1967 These coho salmon were released at various times (Table 19) at four sites near Ice Harbor Dam 461 km above Jones Beach Recoveries of marked fish indicate that the average number of days required to reach Jones Beach decreased by 30 days from late March to mid-May resulting in an increase in rate of movement from 11 5 kmday to 46 l kmday_ Therefore the average coho salmon released in late March at Ice Harbor Dam would have arrived at Jones Beach in early May coho salmon released in mid-April would have arrived in mid-May and those released in mid-May would have arrived in late May The range of the recovery period was broad for early release groups and narrow for late releases
An additional 505840 marked coho salmon were released at Ice Harbor Dam in 1968 (Table 20) Though fewer fish were released our beach seine effort doubled and as a result more marked fish were recovered than in 1967 The release schedule in 1968 began slightly later was interrupted for 13 days in mid-April and was completed 2 weeks earlier than in 1967 The average late-March releases appeared at Jones Beach in early May whereas releases in late April and early May arrived in late May The range of travel time for each group was again broad for early releases and narrow for late releases Once again the rate of movement to the estuary increased as the migratory season progressed but in 1968 the change was more abrupt between early and late April The overall average rate of movement decreased slightly in 1968 (157 kmday) compared with 1967 (17 7 kmday) Completion of the John Day Dam in spring 1968 impounded over 100 km of free-flowing river and perhaps accounted in part for the apparent slower movement of the migration in 1968 Raymond (1968) indicated that rate of movement of yearling chinook salmon through McNary Reservoir was about one-third the rate of movement in free-flowing reaches of the river
Movement of the 1967 and 1968 releases at Ice Harbor Dam is compared in Figure 18 Plotting the time of release against the average number of days to reach Jones Beach for each of the groups of coho salmon indicates a close agreement between the 2 years of travel times that apparently are a function of time of release
2_ Krcma R F C W Long and w M Marquette Fishery Biologists Northwest and Alaska Fisheries Center Coastal Zone and Estuarine Studies Division NMFS NOAA Seattle WA 98112 pers commun and unpubl data
54
V1 V1
Table 19--Rate of movement and recovery of marked coho salmon fingerlings released at Ice Harbor Dam between 24 March and 15 May 1967 and subsequently recovered at Jones Beach
Recovery Number Number rate per Range
Release of coho recovered 10000 of days Days to Standard Average pound_eriod released at Jones Beach released recovered Jones Beach deviation kmday
24-27 March 37790 5 I 3 31-54 402 84 II5
30 March-3 April 87770 15 17 32-53 38 bull 9 72 II8
6-10 April 97051 21 22 20-46 323 75 149
14-17 April 87295 IO 1 I 23-40 312 56 149
21-24 April 91304 12 1 3 17-41 234 69 200
28 April-1 May 89895 5 06 16-25 190 35 243
5 -8 May 84574 7 08 12-17 139 19 329
12-15 May 67444 15 22 3-13 97 27 461
Totals 643123 90 Grand avg 14 26 1 177
Table 20--Rate of movement and recovery of marked coho salmon fingerlings released at Ice Harbor Dam between 28 March and 1 May 1968 and subsequently recovered at Jones Beach
Recovery Number Number rate per Range
Release of coho recovered 10000 of days Days to Standard Average eeriod released at Jones Beach released recovered Jones Beach deviation kmday
28 March 41987 13 31 13 to 59 362 135 128
1 April 34744 8 23 32 to 53 399 79 11 2
2 April 34776 5 14 21 to 48 356 105 132
3 April 34786 4 1 1 30 to 51 390 92 118
4 April 34744 11 32 27 to 48 367 85 128
5 April 34779 7 20 31 to 45 359 55 128
9 April 34789 5 14 36 to 45 392 38 125
10 April 33966 5 15 34 to 44 408 42 118
23 April 62587 16 26 22 to 35 289 38 159
25 April 35971 17 47 19 to 33 260 39 177
26 April 35935 20 56 18 to 32 240 36 192
20 April 32344 11 34 21 to 25 227 16 200
30 April 11982 2 17 23 to 24 235 07 200
I May 42450 28 66 19 to 28 219 19 210
Total 505840 152 Grand avg 30 294 15 7
V -J
-
5 50
60
L
ci (5) w 40-lf (15) -0 30
20 Y -06704X + 42 6092 0
10 r = -08673 0
0
c
0u
60 U)
i 50 0 ( 1 lt4gt(11)(7) 40
a
30 (13) (5) ) z 20 Y -05ll6Xt 405783 Lu
10 a
r -06955 Lu 025 29 2 6
MARCH
1967
(21) (10) (12)
-It- (5) Jl (7)
( 15)
-
1968
( 5)(5) It
(16) (17)(20) (2)--tt
1F-( II) (28)
10 14 18 22 26 30 4 8 12 APRIL MAY
Figure 18 --Relation between rate of migration (ie the average number of days from time of release at Ice Harbor Dam to time of recovery at Jones Beach) of juvenile coho salmon and the date of their release at Ice Harbor Dam 1967-68 The number of coho salmon recovered from each release group is shown in parentheses their average travel time is marked with an asterisk
Variation in Hourly Seine Catches
It was apparent from the sampling at Jones Beach that coho salmon smolts were present in greater numbers during midday than dawn or dusk--there was no sampling at night In 1970 it was possible to assess hourly variations in the catch from 0600 to 1930 h each day throughout the coho salmon migration The coho salmon were separated from other salmon and the total averaged for each 30-minute seine haul during the principal 3 weeks (26 April-16 May) of the outmigration (Fig 19) During these 21 sampling days 34537 coho salmon were captured which was 765 of the 1970 total catch of that species Coho salmon were the dominant species of salmon taken in the 3-week period comprising 652 of all salmon captured Inspection of Figure 19 indicates that coho salmon smolts were captured most frequently between 0830 and 1430 h and the largest catches occurred at midday Samples of coho salmon were marked and released in the area with negligible recoveries We assume therefore that coho salmon smolts are not mil ling in the area but are actively migrating seaward during midday
Fish Length in Relation to Seaward Migration
Fork length samples of coho salmon were taken daily and averaged for each year from 1966 through 1971 (Fig 20) The trend of increasing smolt size is very likely a reflection of the changing rearing techniques at state and federal hatcheries
Differences in the average length of early and late migrating coho salmon smolts were also apparent Larger fish ()125 mm) consistently migrated earlier than the smaller migrants (Fig 21) Shapovalov and Taft (1954) in a 9-year study of Waddell Creek reported a similar gradual decrease in the average size of coho salmon migrants as the season progressed Salo and Bayliff (1958) in a coho salmon life history study on Minter Creek also found large individuals migrating earlier than small fish Apparently this characteristic is not confined to one species since Shapovalov and Taft noted a similar phenomenon for juvenile steelhead of a given age class and Hartman et al (1967) reported that they and other investigators observed a tendency for larger juvenile sockeye salmon to migrate earlier in the_ season than smaller sockeye salmon
The trend toward releasing larger coho salmon in recent years has resulted in earlier timing of the peak migrations as well (Fig 21) For example fish migrating in 1971 (mean annual fork length 138 mm) peaked on 5 May 10 days earlier than those migrating in 1967 (122 mm) Similar relations were also evident in the other years as shown in Figure 22 The strong relation (correlation coefficient r = 085) suggests that the mean annual fork length of coho salmon is a factor in the time that they migrate seaward
58
VI 0
250 I I
225 -
200
175 -
El50 _
-
c 125 i-
lt u 100 I-
75 lt
i-
50 4
25
0
Morning Shift I I Afternoon Shift bullbull
-
-
--
-
--
-
-
--
-
- -
--
- -
-
-
0600 0700 0800 0900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 middot
TIME OF SAMPLING (hour) middot 19 19 19 20 20 20 20 21 21 21 21 21 2 18 21 20 19 20 20 19 19 19 20 20 20
NUMBER OF SETS
Figure 19 --Average seine catches of juvenile coho salmon per half hour for the 3-week period of maximum
availability between 26 April and 16 May 1970
deg 0
-
E140 E
-
-
c
t-()
z
130 -
a
n111120 -() (3111) (2079) (1907) (4415) (6432) (2571) lt( a
w lt(
110 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971
Figure 20 --Average fork lengths of juvenile coho salmon at time of migration through the upper Columbia River estuary 1966-71 (sample size in parentheses)
z LLI
J
a
0 LL
LLI
0
lt a
ILI
gt lt
140
130
1966 120
II 0 140
130
120 1967
110 140
130
120 1968
110
150
140
130
1969
120
110 14
1 130 1970
12014
0
f
130 1971
120 1
5 10
-
r r
15 20 25 30 APRIL
0
0
0
0
o Peak of migrationbased on CPS
5 10 15 20 25 30 4 9 14 MAY JUNE
Figure 21 --Average fork length of juvenile coho salmon captured in the upper Columbia River estuary for each weekly period of the annual smelt migration 1966-71
61
145 -
E v = 1393- asax E
- 140 r = - 085
135 z
LLI
J
130
a 0 LL 125
LLI t)
ltt 120 a LLI
115
5 10 15
MAY
Figure 22 --Relation between annual average fork length of coho salmon smolts and date of annual peak catches at Jones Beach (1966-71)
62
20
Conclusions
1 Juvenile coho salmon migrate into the upper estuary betweenmid-April and late May
2 A relationship exists for yearling coho salmon between their rateof seaward movement and the time of their release and the distance migrated to the estuary Generally coho salmon released in upper reaches of the Columbia River sys tern moved downstream more rapidly than those released near our sampling site Also fingerlings released before mid-April moved at a slower rate than those released in late April or May
3 Maximum catch abundance occurs around midday (0600 to 2000 h)
4 Improvements in rearing technique and diet at Columbia Riverhatcheries during the study period appears to have caused an increase in average annual fork length of coho salmon smolts entering the upper estuary about 10 during this study
5 Average size of migrants characteristically increases through themigration period larger coho salmon smolts (gt 125 mm fork length) were the first to arrive in the upper estuary and were followed by smaller individuals(lt 125 mm)
6 Timing of the annual peak of migration for coho salmon varied inassociation with annual mean fork length overall average size for the migrating population increased through the 6 years of study and the peak of migration came progressively earlier
63
SECTION III--SALMONIDS 1977-1983
Introduction
From 1977 through 1983 millions of juvenile salmonids were marked and released from sites throughout the Columbia River basin (Fig 23 and Table 21) From 23 to 50 of the migrating juveniles were marked each year to evaluate cultural practices bypass systems at dams ocean distribution contribution to the fisheries and other factors Marked fish also provided data to compare timing movement rates physical condition and relative survival differences between stocks following migration to the estuary
The objectives of Jones Beach sampling varied somewhat from year to yearmiddot depending on fishery agency requirements and fish groupsstocks released The general objectives of research from 1977 through 1983 were as follows (1) define variables affecting timing and movement of juvenile salmonids to and through the estuary (2) evaluate recovery rates in relation to river flow release site release date cultural treatment physical traits of migrants and effects of the 18 May 1980 eruption of Mount St Helens (3) evaluate trends of relative survival and relate to survival of adults and (4) compare wild and hatchery fish stocks
Methods
Sampling
From 1977 through 1983 beach and purse seines were u sed to sample juvenile salmonids at Jones Beach (RKm 75) near Woodson Oregon (Fig 24) In some years additional sites were sampled In 1978 beach seines were used at Sand Island (RKm 9) and Clatsop Spit (RKm 7) from 1978 to 1980 purse seines were used at McGowan ( RKm 16) at incidental sites throughout the estuary and in the Columbia River ocean plume ( 24 km radius of the river mouth)
Each year sampling was intensive during spring and summer ( 7 hday 5-7 daysweek) additional limited sampling was conducted during fall and winter Sampling procedures levels of effort and catches of marked and unmarked fish are listed and summarized by Dawley et al (1985a and b)
Beach and purse seine sampling and subsequent examination of juvenile salmonids caused mechanical injury and stress which resulted in immediate (0-20) and delayed (0-5) mortality Delayed mortality was as ses sed by retaining a random sample of about 50 fish in a net-pen for 24 h 3 daysweek in May and June 1983 and occasionally during other years
Weather river and tidal conditions during sampling affected catches of juvenile salmonids At Jones Beach our ability to sample was unimpaired however sampling efficiency changed with variations in river flow Colum bia River flow (measured at Bonneville Dam by the US Army Corps of Engineers 1977-1983) varied widely within and between years (Fig 25) During the
64
Table 21--0rigins of marked juvenile salmonids captured during estuarine or ocean sampling 1977-1983 Footnotes identify organizations responsible for marked fish groups
Abernathy SCDC ol
AlseQ Hat bl Anadromous Inc cl
Aumsville Pd b
Big Creek Hat bl Bonneville Hat bl
Cascade Hat bl Casey Pd a
Corson Hat ol
Chelan Hat di Chinook R Pd el
Cowlitz Salmon Hot fl
Cowlitz Trout Hat di DecKer Flats Pd gl Deschutes R bl
Dexter Pd b Dry Cr hi
Dworshak Hat a Eagle Cr Hat al
Elokomin Hat fl
Entiat Hat d Gnat Cr Hot b Grays R Hat fl Hagerman Hat al
Hoyden Pd g Ice Harbor D i John Day D i John Day R b John Doy Reservoir ii
Jones Beach i Kalamo Falls Hat fl
Kloskanine Hot bl
Klickitat Hat fl
KoosKio Hot al
Leavenworth Hat ol
Lewis R f Lewis R Hat fl
Lit Goose D ii
Lit Wh Sal Hat al
Lo Granite D ii Lower Kalama Hat fl
Lyons Ferry Hot al
Marion Fks Hat b McColl Hat g McKenzie Hot b McNary D ii
Naches Hat d Nehalem Hat b Nelson Sp Pd h Niagara Springs Hat gl Oakridge Hat b Oak Springs Hat b Oregon Aqua J Oxbow Hat bl
Pahsimeroi Rearing Pdg Potterson Slough Q Pr Rapid Spaw Ch f Quinalt Hat fl
Rapid R Hot gl Red R Hat g Riggins Trap i Ringold Rearing Pd f
Rnd Butte Hat bl
Rnd Butte Ladder b Roaring River Hat bl
Rocky Reach Dam kl S Santiom Hot bSFk Klaskanine Pd 11middotSandy Hot blSatus Cr hiSawtooth Hot gSiletz R bl
Skamania Hat diSpeelyai Hot fl
Spring Cr Hat ol
Stayton Pds bThe Dallas D bl amp ii
Toutle Hat fl
Tucannon Hat dTurtle Rock Pd kUpper Kalama Hot fVanderveldt Pd 11Villiard Slough aWallowa Hot aWarm Spring R Hat aWarm Spring R blWarm Spring Trap bWashougal Hat fl
Wells Spaw Ch di amp flWeyco Pd fWhitebird Trap iiWillard Hot al
Winthrop Hat a
al US Fish and Wildlife Service Fisheries Assist Office 2625 Porkmont Lane Bldg A Olympia WA 98502
b Oregon Dept of Fish g Wildlife PO Box 3503 Portland OR 97208 c Anadromous Incorporated Rt 2 Box 2013 Deer Island OR 97054 di Washington Dept Gome 600 North Capital Way Olympia WA 98504 el Sea Resources PO Box 187 Chinook WA 98614 fl Washington Dept Fisheries 115 General Admin Bldg Olympia WA 98504 g Idaho Dept Fish amp Game 1540 Worner Ave Lewiston ID 83501 h Yakima Indian Notion Fish Resources Management PO Box 151 Toppenish
WA 98948 ii Natl Hur Fish Serv 2725 Montlake Blvd E Seattle WA 98112 J Oregon Aqua Foods Inc 88700 Hurcolu Rd Springfield OR 97477 kl Chelan County PUD PO Box 1231 Wenatchee WA 98801 1 Clatsop Economic Dev Comm osu Seafoods Lab 250 36th AstortQ
OR 97103
65
125
-- LEGEND
Release site Rkm Release site Rkm Release site Rkm Release site Rkm
LOWER COLUMBIA R amp TRIBS 41 Port Kelly Wash 501 DESCHUTES R amp TRIBS CLEARWATER R amp TRIBS 42 Walla Walla RMo 507
1 Chinook R Pd 11 43 Casey Pd 516 76 Deschutes RMo 330 108 N Fk Clearwater R 809
2 Hammond Ore 13 44 Villiard Slough 521 77 Sherars Falls-Ho 363 109 Clear Cr 868
3 Tucker Cr 29 78 DeschutesRM 43 395 110 S Fk Clearwater R 941
4 Stavebolt Cr 34 79 Oak Springs Hat 404 111 Lochsa R 1026
5 Klaskanine R 37 MID COLUMBIA R amp TRIBS
80 Maupin Trap RH 50 408
6 Big Cr 49 45 Pnsco Wnsh 522 81 WmSp R-Sher Fall 425 SALMON R amp TRI BS
7 CrnyR RR 13 57 46 Yakimn RHo 539 82 Dry Cr-Wm -p R 446
8 Grays RRM 21 68 47 Richland Wash 540
83 DeschutesRH 84 463 112 Whf tlthird Trnp 9118
9 Jones Beach 75 48 Ringold Pd 568 84 Warm Spring Trap 464 113 Riggins Trnp 959
10 Beaver Terminal 84 49 Wh Bluffs 596 85 Pelton D-Wm Sp R 473 114 Rnpid R Hat 7
11 Abernathy Cr 91 50 Vernita Brid 629 86 Warm Spring R 479 115 lit Sal R 971
12 Elokomin R 94 51 Pr Rapid Spaw Ch 639
87 Warm Spring RHat 485 116 S Fk Salmon R 1151 13 Rainier Ore 109 52 Crab Cr 660
88 DeschutesRM 100 489 117 Lltmhi RHo 1239 14 Prescott Ore 115
53 Wanapum D 669 89 Beaver Cr-Wm Sp R 494 118 Lemhi R 1294
Kalama RRH 6 127 90 Rnd Butte Ladder 503 15 54 Vantage Brid 674 119 Pahsimeroi R 1311 16 Kalama RRM 15 141 91 Rnd Butte Hat 506 120 Upper Salmon R 1446 55 Rock Island D 725 17 Green R 160
56 Rocky Reach D 761 18 Lewis R 163
57 Turtle Rock Pd 768 JOHN DAY R 19 Cowlitz RRM 47 184 YAKIHA R
58 Icicle Cr 789 20 Cowlitz RRH 50 189
59 Entiat R 790 92 John Day RMo 349 121 651 Satus Cr 21 Dalton P t 206 60 Chelan Hat 813 93 John Day RRM 16 374 122 Dry Cr 681 22 Washougal RRM 10 213 61 Wells Spaw Ch 828 94 John DaySpray Ore 623
23 Skamania Light 219 62 Hethow RHo 838 95 N Fk John DRM 60 744
24 Washougal RRH 15 221 63 Pateros Ferry 839 96 M Fk John DRM 32 749
OUTSIDE COLUMBIA RIVER BASIN
25 Beacon Rock 227 64 Methow RRM 28 893 97 John DGranite Cr 788
26 Blw Bonn D 230 65 Methow RHat 919
123 Siletz R
27 Tanner Cr 231 SNAKE R amp TRIBS
124 Yaquina Bay
28 Sandy R 235 125 Coos Bay Ore
29 Lit Wh Sal RRM 2 261 WILLAMETTE R amp TRIBS 98 Ice Harbor D 537
JO Lit Wh Sal RRM 5 268 99 Fishhook Park 557
YAKIMA R
31 Spring Cr Hat 269 66 Willamette Falls 207 99a Lyons Ferry 600 32 Big Wh Rear Pd 273 67 Hollalla R 220
100 Texas Rapids 630
126 Nelson Sp Pd 734
33 Wind R 275 68 Clackamas R middot247 34 The Dalles D 306 69 Tualatin RScogg 304
101 Lit Goose D 634
127 Nile Sp Pd 773
35 John Day D 347 70 Hill Cr 308 102 Tucannon R 691
128 Ellensburg 776
103 Lo Granite D 693 36 Towal Wash 351 71 S SantiamSpt Ld 411
104 Clarkston Wash 742 37 Klickitat R 358 72 S SantiamFoster 416
105 Asotin Wash 754
LOWER COLUMBIA RIVER
38 Blalock Shore 375 73 N SantiamMlnto 452 106 Grand Ronde R 793
39 Patterson Slough 448 74 H Fk Willia11Dexter 491 107 Wallowa Hat 940
129 Rock Cr 368
40 NcNary D 470 75 HcKenzieLeaburg 492
130 Biggs 335 111 Tongue Pt 2R
132 Conf E Fork Levis 146
Figure 23 --Map and list of release sites for marked fish in the ColumbiaRiver system with index numbers for location
66
I
I
I
Lightship
I
I
Klipsan Beach bull
-
middotmiddot
Seaside iJ
l
middotmiddot
WASHINGTON
FISHING SITES IN
I J I I 012345
km
COLUMBIA RIVER ESTUARY AND ADJACENT OCEAN AREAS
18J Primary purse seine sites
e Primary beach seine sites Secondary purse seine sites 0 Secondary beach seine sites
OREGON
bull Intermittent purse seine sites
Figure 24--The Columbia River estuary and adjacent Pacific Ocean showing sampling sites
- 12 __(I) M
E C C Ill en 0
r t
E Ill
0 8 middotsClgt C
C
0
6 C0
Ill
0
4 Clgt gt
middot
8Ill
gt Ill
2 Clgt
io
0 0
t- 15 12 17
March April May
1982I
1983 bull
14 12
June July16
Aug13
Sept
Figure 25--Weekly average Columbia River flows for 1977 mean of 1978-1982 1982 and 1983 collated from data supplied by US Army Corps of Engineers Portland Oregon
68
period of spring outmigatio ns April-June river flows in 1977 were extremelylow ( 2900 to 4400 m second) flws in 1978 1979 1980 and 1981 weremoderate (averaging 4700 to 8900 m scond) and in 1982 and 1983 were high(8100 to 11700 and 5900 to 11300 m second respectively) We evaluated the change relative to river flow and for certain analyses adjusted catch data to compensate Water temperatures at Jones Beach fluctuated in a fairly consistent pattern during winter from 1deg to S degC during spring from 6 deg to 17 degC and during summer from 18deg to 21degC (Dawley et al 1985a) In the lower estuary (RKm 1-16) and the ocean plume conditions encountered affected catch ef ficieny and our ability to sample Consequently data pertaining to juveniles in the lower es tualiy and ocean -were used pmiddotrimarily for timing and movement rate analyses and not for survival estimates
Analysis
Subyearling chinook salmon were predominantly fal l and summer races whereas yearling chinook salmon were predominantly a spring race (Van Hyning 1973) they were separated for analyses and presentation Marked fish were classified from mark release information provided by the fishery organizations whereas unmarked fish were classified on the basis of fork length [error rates varied from O to 4 (Dawley et al 1985a)] Jones Beach mark recovery data were expanded to represent a standard effort of 10 beach seine sets and 5 purse seine sets per day 7 days per week Details of expansion formula are in Dawley et al (1985b) Sampling from other sites was not adjusted
Marked fish movement rates were calculated using distance traveled and time between first date of release and the 10 fish recovery or the median fish recovery at Jones Beach
Juvenile catch percentages were compared with adult recoveries from the fisheries hatcheries and spawning grounds The adult recovery data include recoveries from the fisheries spawning surveys and hatcheries which were obtained from the Washington Department of Fisheries (WDF) Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) US Fish and Wildlife Service ( FWS) and the Pacific Marine Fisheries Commission (PMFC) Comparisons between groups released at different times or locations may result in erroneous in terpre ta tions because of differences in ocean distribution unequal fishing or sampling effort
Relative Survival
To assess the statistical validity of estimated survival differences between treatment and control groups catch differences were evaluated in relation to observed differences between replicate groups previously captured at Jones Beach (Appendix Table Bl) To simplify the evaluation an empirical power of the test curve was developed where catch ratios (no caughtno released) of replicate mark groups were averaged (U) the percent difference between this average and each individual catch ratio was then cal culated (Y) and plotted versus the number of fish captured (X) The curve in Figure 26 represent s the 95 confidence level (Plt005) for the hypothesis that no difference exists between groups
69
The empirical method was used for detecting significant differences between catch ratios for treatment and control groups Differences were plotted in Figure 26 to discern if they weremiddot greater than those observed between replicate groups with similar numbers of recoveries at Jones Beach If any of the plotted points fell outside the range observed for replicate groups significant differences existed between the catches of trea bnent and control groups For example to evaluate the difference between two stocks of steelhead from Hagerman Hatchery released in the upper Salmon River we use the following data
Size No captured Sto ck (nolb) No released Actual Adjusted u X y
--
A 2 38800 84 109 omiddot003 20 84 12A 5 39100 104 142 104 13 B 4 3 7600 102 119 102 1
All data points for X and Y fall inside the range of replicate groups (Fig 26) consequently we conclude there was no detectable difference in survival to the estuary for Stocks A and B Statistical evaluation using the G statistic (Sokal and Rohlf 1981) provides a similar conclusion but takes longer to cal culate and in some instances may provide erroneous conclusions because no adjustment for sampling effort is included The empirical evaluation accounts for variation (including random) that has affected previous sampling consequently it provides a more precise evaluation (Efron and Morris 1975)
Assessments of statistical differences among adult recoveries from mark groups were made using the G statistic at P lt 005 rejection of the null hypothesis (no difference)
Relative survival estimates for mark groups given various treatments were made by comparing catch percentages of control and treatment groups by the following formulamiddot
( catch treatment - catch control) x 100 = dif ference catch control in survival
Results and Discussion
Numbers of marked and unmarked fish captured during estuary samplin g varied from a high of 370000 in 1977 of to a low of 170000 in 1980 (Fig 27) The variation was related to numbers of juveniles released from culture facilities sampling effort and river flow which may have altered catch efficiency In 1980 decreased catches also resulted from the effects of the 18 May erupt ion of Mount St Helens
70
Empirical Power of Test Curve
Replicate groups 1977-1983
METHOD FOR CALCULATING POINTS
70 --- A= Adjusted no of catch per mark group R = No released per mark group i = Individual mark group n =No of replicate groups in comparison
60 --1-4-+----1
- - c J0-+-middotmiddot___middot------1
middotmiddot di middotmiddot
- ----+--+------ a bull bull I gt- I 20-f-_J t---+r+--1--4--1
u
y = X 100
u
X = Actual catch no per mark group
---middotmiddot - 10middot--t-c1s-t--+---=-r--1---1---+---------- - ----
fi(middotmiddot ----
100 200 300 400 Fish captured per group (number)
Figure 26--Empirical power of the test curve developed by comparing differences between catch percentages for replicate mark groups to number caught =treatment groups from example in text
71
V
O C
i 0
-5
0
O C 0
E
0
_
E
z
SMOL T CATCHES FROM COLUMBIA RIVER ESTUARY
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
--
l -0
q Ln
Ln CJ) N
x
x
Ln () 0 CJ) in ltI 0 0 N -() _ () in CX) N CX)
1977 1978 1979 1980
Ye a r
bull Includes off-shore and lower estuary
Ln () x
x
_
V CX)
0 C)
L1 CJ)
1981 1982
_
1N deg
__
(I)
cu
co Cl
1983
Figure 27--Numbers of marked (darkened area) and unmarked salmonids
captured at Jones Beach 1977-1983 Percentage of marked
fish in total catch is shown in parenthesis
72
Migrational Timing
Migration patterns of juvenile salmonids into the estuary depicted by catch per set (CPS) averages were similar between years Few fish were captured in January and February (less than 10 fish captured per set) A small CPS peak of yearling and subyearling chinook salmon (25 to 95) occurred in March followed by a decline in early to mid-April Steadily increasing numbers of yearling and subyearling chinook salmon coho salmon and steelhead occurred after mid-April with peak catches in May and early June ( 100 to 200 CPS for yearlings and up to 1000 CPS for subyearlings) Yearling fish catches declined rapidly during June to less than 10 CPS by early July and almost none were captured through the end of the year Variable numbers of subyearli ng fish were captured in July and August ( 25 to 350 CPS) catches then declined in September (15 to 75 CPS) Small peaks of subyearling Chinook salmon were recorded in November ( 10 to 40 CPS) and decreased in December (less than 5 CPS) The catch per set pattern of 1983 (Fig 28) depicts a migration pattern similar to most years catch patterns for other years are presented in Dawley et al (1985a)
Spring and Summer Migrations --In general timing for upriver stocks migrating through reservoirs and past dams is char7terized in reports by Simset al (1978-1983) and by the Water Budget Center- At Jones Beach peaks of migration for yearling chinook salmon coho salmon and steelhead were generally in the latter part of May (Table 22) subyearling chinook salmon showed a wider variation of migration pattern than yearlings but generally the peaks were directly related to release dates of major hatcheries and river flow
Fall and Winter Migrations--Attempts to decrease rearing costs andor increase adult returns prompted renewed efforts in the 1970s and 1980s to determine the effects of releasing salmonids during fall (Smith 1979a Hansen et al 1979) Preliminary recoveries of adults indicated benefits in some instances (Smith and Zakel 1981) and none in others (Hansen 1982) Researchers were concerned that some of the fall released juveniles would overwinter in tributaries and compete with wil d stocks Observations demonstrating residualism were made at the Pelton Ladder on the Deschutes River (Hart et al 1980) and at Jones Beach (Dawley et al 1978)
At Jones Beach sampling was extended into the fall winter and early spring of 1978-79 1981-82 and 1982-83 to examine the timing and migration success of fall released fish Most fish released in the fall migrated past Jones Beach before 15 December the remainder passed primarily in late February March and April (Table 23) Large portions of a few groups however wintered upstream from Jones Beach and migra terl during the spring In 1982-83 when the effort at Jones Beach was substantial throughout most of
1 Water Budget Center 2705 E Burnside Suite 213 Portland OR 97214
73
Table 22--Dates of migrational peaks for juvenile salmonids at Jones Beach indicating migrational overlap 1977-1983
Year
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
a
b 71
Chinoo SubyearlingID
21-27 May
11-17 June
2-8 July
11-17 June
6-10 June
11-17 June
4-10 June
Week of peak migration salmon
Yearlingd Coho
salmonpound
7-13 May 14-20 May
14-20 May 28 May-3 June
7-13 May 14-20 May
7-13 May 14-20 May
21-27 May 21-27 May
14-20 May 21-27 May
Steelhead
14-20 May
14-20 May
7-13 May
7-13 May
21-27 May
21-27 May
From the date of median fis h recovery not adjusted for river flow Timing based on beach seine catches Timing based on purse seine catches
74
Table 23--Catches of marked juvenile chinook salmon at Jones Beach (RKm 75) released in fall and late summer 1977-1983
-______ __RLittilf2t9llJGI Recovelnforaatian___
=--_ __________ __FaII ---- lilner1S2ri_nq_ __ TaCJ
lftgDlD2) Source Treotaent lo
Mer Jltn--
Sin Gear c ---sr- Date d ioj Date d Dealt II lnalbl code- 1110Hno I lGllgi lnaHna) Z Nngii Site stock C bou I
--- bull ---------------- bull ------------ 1971 JI ------------------------------ bull -
631715 Colllitz I ltlt 844 28 Se 77 12 B O O O 1 l 0002 03 9 P O O 0
0916127 SScatia1 IIGt 287 07 No 77 13 8 0 0 0 1 2 0008 11 Ap-02 lly P l 1 0005
091628 SS4lltfo1 I IIGt 563 07 No 77 11 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 P 1 1 0005
2Up
091630 SScaUa1 I lGt 845 08 Na 77 l1 8 0 0 0 7 13 0015 27 llr-28 Ap 31-2 P 8 12 0014
---- - ------- ----- ---------- ----- -lfn- - - ----- -------------- ---- - --- --
0111656 Bonneville I Bann Tule 887 JO lie 78 13 8 19 95 0107 06 Ho-12 D e 10 28 0032 20 llr-12 Ap I 59 P 1 middot7 0008 O O 0
0716158 Bonneville I Bann Brigllt 892 30 De 78 22 8 22 79 0089 06 Ho-17 No 10 44 0049 15 Fe-OJ lly I 60 P 8 32 0036 0 0 0
071626 BoMeville I llill Cr 1508 8-9 No n 23 8 O o o 13 De 17 62 0041 05 llr-04 lly 1917-18 P 1 8 0015 9 33 0022
071737 Dexter I Dexter Tule 230 07 Ho 78 7 8 O o O D Ho-05 De O O O 22 llr-05 Ap P 3 30 0131 2 15 0067
6317147 IC Falls I Hot 1409 15 Se 78 34 8 101 368 0261 20 Se-OB Ha 8 16 0012 02 Ap-21 Ap P 0 0 0 0 0 0
050352 Levis 53-54
I Let1is F Chin 1082 01 Ho 78 39 8 3 18 0051 12 De 4 35 0032 15 Fe-04 ftp P 0 0 0 0 0 0
071727 lluian FKS I llinta 071738 Oakridge 071739 Oakridge
I Dexter I Dexter I Dexter
Carson
071740 Oakridge 100328 Red R SFl( Clear11tter 0711926 SSantia11 I Hot
27-2B Uillio
071929 SSanti111 BlwUillabull Fall I 30
929 06 Ha 7B 240 07 Ho 78 289 07 Ho 78 294 07 Ho 7B 370 21 Se 78 854 07 Ho 78 654 07 Ho 78
23 8
15 25 34 8 a
8 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 llr-11 Jn P O O O 18 34 0037 8 0 0 0 04-05 De 1 3 0011 P 2 15 0063 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 1 8 0029 P O O O 1 J 0004 8 0 0 0 1 J 0010
29 llr-30 llr 18 llr-18 Ap 06 11-01 lly
P O O O 1 1 0004 B O O O O O O 03-06 JnP O O O 6 7 0019 8 0 O O 05 De J 30 0035 27 Fe-02 lly P 3 23 0044 2 2 0002 8 1 15 0046 10 HO-OS De 5 10 0015 04 Ap-30 Ap P 5 IO 0076 5 7 0011
------------ --------------------- 1my- -------------------------------
071735 B onneville I Hat Brights 512 20 Ho 79 12 B 4 7 0013 23 lly-17 ll y l
1middot 0003
071914 Bonneville I Hot Tule 487 20 Ho 79 9 8 3 0031 09-30llr p 0 0
09 llr-23 llp 631942 Colllitz Ho 234 16 0c 79 85 8 9 21 0015 p 0 0 0
6319151 Cowlitz I Hot 78 16 De 79 85 B 6 21 0194 11 Mr-05 My middotp 2 5 0048
072049 llcKende I Leoburg 316 09 Ha 79 B 1 3 0009 27 llr 0 0 0
0712050 llcKe nzie I Leaburg 284 09 NO 79 7 8 l 4 0014 11 Mr-15 llp p 1 2 0007
072052 llcKenzie I LetibUNJ 33B 09 Ho 79 15 8 3 8 0022 19 llr-30 App 0 0 0
631920 lewis Spe elYGi 517 05 Se 79 28 8 18 81 0156 11-25 Se l 2 0004 27 llp p 0 0 0
072047 Oakridge Dexter Larqe 313 05 Ho 79 9 8 2 3 0011 24 llr-02 Ap p 0 0 0
072045 ampkridge I Dexter Ungraded 309 05 Na 79 14 8 3 7 0022 24 llr-23 Ap p 3 3 0011
072043 Oalridge I Dexter llediu1 313 05 Ha 79 16 8 4 11 0036 12 Mr-09 llpp 1 2 0006
072041 Oakridge I Dexter S1all 308 05 Ha 79 29 B 2 4 0014 18 llr-25 llr p 0 0 0
75
Table 23--continued
071943 Oakridge Foster 320 7-8 fo 79 9 B 4 9 0028 26 Hr-29 Ny p 1 1 0004
071944 Dok ridge BlwWillFGll 348 08 No 79 10 B 2 4 0012 02 Ap-04 Ap p 2 7 0020
102112 Red Riv SFkCleorwoter 438 25-7 Se 79 27 B 1 1 0003 OJ Hy-08 Jn p s 9 0022
072020- SSantia111 foster 1020 s-amp Ho 79 9 B 0 0 0 14 Ap-22 Ap 22 p 4 8 0008
0720181 SSantia1 BlvWillfoll 698 S-6 lfo 79 9 B 5 9 0013 19 Hr-18 Ap 19 p 2 6 0009
-- ------------------------------- 1980 fl --------------------------------
071734 Bonn Hot Hot Brighb 513 05 No 80 14 B 1 4 0007 18 Hr p 0 0 0
0722471 Morion Fks I Hln-to Caron 1000 OS Ho 80 20 B 0 0 0 11 Ap-23 Ny 48 p 9 18 0018
072218 McKenzie Leaburg 324 05 No 80 11 B 0 0 0 31 Hr-01 Ap p 1 2 0006
072221 McKenzie Leoburg 379 OS No 80 15 B 0 0 0 06 Ap-21 Ap p 4 9 0024
072306 Dok ridge H Dexter 301 S-6 Ho 80 28 B 0 0 0 31 Hr p 1 2 0006
072224 Oakridge H Dexter 271 S-6 fo 80 11 B 0 0 0 31 Hr p 1 2 0006
102127 Red R I SFKCleorwoter 495 16 Se 80 25 B 0 0 0 OS Hy-OS Jn p 6 9 0017
050820amp Won Spr Hot Hot 547 01 Ho 80 9 B 0 0 0 13 Ap-01 Hy 21 p 2 4 0007
--------------------------------- 11------------------------------- -
0721381 39
0721411 42
072237
072523 24
0712223
072517
072519
072418
072308
On423
072347
0712349
Bonn Hot Hot Tule 1016
Bonn Hot Hilt Brights 1005 OtcKen SUgt
[lexter Dexter Ungraded 294
Morion Fks Hinto 92J
McKenzie
KcKenzie
ltcKenzie
Dok ridge
Oakridge
Oakridge
Leoburg Ungraded 311
I Leabbullirg Large 311
Leoburg ttediua (Oakridge stk)
e Dexter Lorge 317
I Del(ter Ungrcded 297
Dexter Hediua 317
Rd Butte Hot e Hat 442
Rd Butte Hot I Hilt 269
09 Ho 81 10 B p
09 Ho 81 10 B p
05 Ho 81 4 B
03 No 81 24 p B p
OS No 81 8 B p
OS No 81 s B p
OS Ho 81 18 B p
OS Ho 81 6 B p
05 Ho 81 9 B
05 Ho 81 19 p B p
05 De 81 6 B p
OS Oc 81 11 8 p
11 - 18 Ho 0 0 0 07 Hr-07 Ap 8 42 0041 9 41 0040
- 11 - 13 No 0 0 0 25 - 29 Hr6 33 0033 2 1l 0011
16 ffo-03 De o 0 0 28 - 29 Hr 12 45 0154 1 3 0011
- 0 0 0 25 Ap-23 Ny 0 0 0 7 9 0010 - 16 - JO No 0 0 0 9 42 0135 0 0 0
16 - 19 No 0 0 0 ll 44 0140 0 0 0
0 0 0 28 - 29 ltr 0 0 0 2 7 0018
25 - 27 No 0 0 0 J 16 0051 0 0 0
- 3 18 0060 12 Nr-01 ftp 0 0 0 2 5 0017 - 0 0 0 14 Nr-03 ftp 0 0 0 3 13 0041 - - - 26 No-03 De 0 0 0 2 13 0028 0 0 0
0 0 0 05 Jly 0 0 0 1 1 0004
------------------------------------------------------ -------- ---
072363 Bonn lbt e Hot JuleWell 459 01 Ho 82 11 B 115 236 0522 4 8 0018 13 - 29 Hr
p 4 9 0020 0 0 0 072546 Bonn Hot Hot Tu leTonner 51 6 01 No 82 12 B lCO 07 0401 5 5 001 27 Ja-08 ltr
p 18 41 0079 0 0 0 072548 Bonn Hot Hot BrightWell 507 01 No 82 12 B 97 209 0412 2 2 0004 17 Fe-03 Hr
p 8 19 0037 0 0 0 0712545 Bonn HGt Helt BrightTllnner 486 01 Ho 82 12 8 94 228 0445 0 0 0
p 13 2 0051 0 0 0 050952amp Cowlitz Hot Big White 2959 21 Ho 82 30 B 2 0001 7 17 0006 27 Ja-05 Hy
53 RA PI 124 p 3 0002 3 6 0002 632450amp Covlitz Hot e lbt 59S 01 Se 82 JO 8 8 0029 OJ No-19 No 7 12 0020 26 Ja-22 P
2603 p 0 0 1 J ooosLB SU J Dworshak Hot Hot 281 16 De 82 12 B 0 0 0 0 0 24 ltr-05 Hy
p 0 0 5 9 0032
76
Table 23--continued
0712521
0712719
0717121
0727115
072520
HcKenzie Hat Leaburg Ungraded 323
lkKenzie Hat e Le12burg Large 320
llcKenzie Hat e Leaburg llediu1 319
Rnd Butte Hat Hat Hora lncu 562
Rnd Butte Kat Hat Fastlncu 268
08 Ho 82
08 Ho 92
08 Ho 92
11 De 82
11 De 82
11 B 0 p 2
7 B 2 p 2
16 B 2 p l
24 8 0 p 0
6 B 0 2
0 0 26 Ho 7 9 0029 11 Hr 5 0014 0 0 0 5 0014 30 Ko-10 De 9 11 0033 26 JobulllO Nr 5 0014 0 0 0 5 0014 30 Ho-09 De 7 15 0045 12middot28Nr 2 0007
1 0003
0 0 0 0 25 bull 30Ap 0 0 2 2 0004 0 0 06 llo-10 De 0 0 0 4 0016 0 0 0
---------------------------------ttv--------------------------------
632610
101320
101321
1013122
101323
072843
0712837
632259
632239
63223B
Co111itz illlt e 11at F Chin 1464 02 No 83 20 8 23 177 0121 04 bull 18 Ho -
p 7 14 0010 Eagle Cr Qt e Hat Stress 364 17 De B3 9 B 2 3 0008 02 No-22 Ho -
p J 1 0044 Eagle Cr Kat f Hot Control 366 17 Oc B3 B B I 2 0004 10 Ho-11 No -
Eagle Cr Kat e Hat Control 358 17 De B3 p 0 0 0
B B 1 2 0006 OB Ho-22 No bull
Eagle Cr Hot Hot Control 385 17 Oc 83 p 2 ll 0031 B 0 0 O 02 Ho-22 No -
Rnd But ti Hat fl Hat Noralncub 536 06 De 83 p 2 10 0025
14 I 1 2 0003 10 No
Rnd Butte H11t e Hot Fast Incub 282 06 Oc 83 p 0 0 0 8 2 13 0047 24 Oc-07 Ho -
llashougal 4t I Hot F Chin 1012 31 A11 83 p 1 2 0005
28 B 101 280 0276 06 Se-05 0c -
llashougal 114 f Hot F Chin 1006 11 Oc BJ p 15 153 0151
23 8 39 307 0305 16 Oc-06 No bull p 29 145 0144
W1shougol Hat e Hot F Chin 1003 02 No 83 22 9 71 495 0494 06 - 15 No -p 1 2 0002
_ Only groups with recoveries at Jones Beach are listed More complete information available from Dawley et al 1985b or releasing agency Table 1 Binary coded wire tags AgcAgency code Dl=Data l code and D2=Data 2 code Color coded wire tags begin with WH and each two digits thereafter represent a color Brands are represented by the following Loc=Location on fish Sym=Brand symbol and Rot=Rotation of symbol For abbreviations symbol and descriptions see Dawley et al 1985b Abbreviations are listed Blwmdownstream of Bonn=Bonneville Bright=Stock of fall chinook salmon which changes color only after extended residence in fresh water F Chin=Fall chinook salmon Fk=Forks Hat=Hatchery Incu=lncubation K=Kalama Large=Fish selected for largest size McKen=McKenzie Medium=Fish selected for medium size Rd=Round R=River S=South Small=Fish selected for smallest size Spr=Springs Stk=Stock Tanner=Reared in Tanner Creek water Tule=Lower river stock of fall chinook salmon Ungraded=No selection for size Well=Reared in well water WillamgWillamette and =Released at
_ Two letter abbreviation for months Se Oc No De Ja Fe Mr Ap My Jn
represent September through June
5= B = beach seine and P = purse seine
ii Range of dates for beach and purse seine recoveries combined
= No purse (low B effort)
No fall and winter sampling
p No fall and winter beach seine
bf No winter and spring sampling
77
300
250
200
150
100
50
E C
Q
c
100
50
200
150
100
50
0
50
0
200
150
100
50
YEARLING CHINOOK
SALMON
COHO SALMON
SOCKEYE SALMON
STEELHEAD
15 15
Jan Feb March
SUBYEARLING CHINOOK SALMON
No
Effort
O Purse n bull 15719
bull Beach n bull 4129
o Purse n bull 21992
bull Beach n bull 7286
O Purse n bull 4496
bull Beach n bull 174
o Purse n bull 24127
bullBeach nbull419
o Purse n bull 30507
bull Beach n bull 107180
0 ------t------+f-f--Ct-lll=Ct--1--+---1---f--l---LlJ__---J____lrD4--ti1__J_-1 18 14 12
Jan March April May June July
1983
Aug 15
Dec
Figure 28--Weekly catch per set averages for subyearling chinook yearling chinoo coho and sockeye salmon and steelhead caught by beach and purse seines at Jones Beach 1983
78
the year catch data indicated that nearly 50 of th fall released spring chinook salmon from the Big fite Rearing Facility41 the Cowlitz RoundButte an1
McKenzie Hatcheriesl and all fish from the Dworshak National FishHatchery - overwintered in the river in 1982-83 then migrated in the spring of 1983 The smaller fish of most stocks showed the greatest tendency to residualize
Movement Rates
Raymond (1979) related increased river flow to faster movement rates and higher survival of juvenile salmonids migrating through the Snake and Columbia Rivers to The Dalles Dam He also linked decreased river flows to slow movement rate and low survival
At Jones Beach o bse rva tions of movement rates and dates of pas sage for individual mark groups indicate that movement rates of lower river hatcheryshyreared subyearling chinook salmon were strongly correlated with river flow but movement rates of subyearl ing chinook salmon and yearling salmonids migrating downstream from McNary Dam were not well correlated with river flow A relationship between movement rate and adult survival was not attainable because of the diversity of the fish groups examined
Annual averages for movement rates of each species during migration from release sites to Jones Beach ranged from 7 to 36 kmday (Table 24) Movement rates of individual tag groups ranged from 1 to 80 kmday The fastest movement s from release site to Jones Beach were measured for groups of steelhead captured and tagged at Lower Granite Little Goose and McNary Dams and subsequently transported to various release sites downstream from Bonneville Dam (Park et al 1984) The slowest movement rates resulted from (1) individuals that resided in the Columbia River or its tributariesoverwinter and migrated in the spring (2) yearling chinook salmon released inMarch and April and (3) groups of fall chinook salmon released at a smallsize (100lb or greater) during May June and July
Little or no cessation of migration was observed for juvenile salmonids in the Columbia River estuary which is substantially different from observations from estuaries of smaller northwest rivers (Reimers 1973 Bottom 1981 and Healey 1980) The average movement rates of subyearling chinook salmon decreased 30 between Jones Beach (RKm 75) and McGowan (RKm 16) compared to the average rate from upstream release sites to Jones Beach Movement rates of yearling Chinook salmon coho salmon and steelhead through the estuary compared to rates to the estuary showed no difference a 40 increase and a 50 increase respectively (Table 24) The period of capture for individual mark groups at McGowan was generally equal to or shorter than the duration observed for the same groups at Jones Beach Similar dates of recovery were noted for marked fish captured in the beach seine at Sand Island
4 5 6
Fisheries Assistance Office USFWS Vancouver WA 98665 pers commun E M Smith ODFW 3150 E Main St Springfield OR 97477 pers communT C Bjornn Co-op Fish Res Unit Moscow ID 8384 3 pers commun
79
Table 24--Annual average and range of movement rates for selected groups of markedjuvenile salmon and steelhead from release site to Jones Beach fromJones Beach to the lower estuary from Jones Beach to the ocean plume1977-1983
----------- --------
Release Site to Jones Beach ltRK1 75)a Rk 75 to Rkm 16 I Rka 75 to Plu1e cj llf77 1978 1979 1YO 1981 1982 1983 1978 1979 1980 1i1a 1979 lliQ
Subyearling chinook salmon
Aver11ge (k11day) 7 16 21 19 18 16 22 4 11 25 6 10 21 Range (klday) 2-27 5-39 2-48 2-48 4-32 2-41 4-31 2-59 1-59 2-59 1-20 1-50 1-99No aark group 10 13 14 10 12 12 3 14 9 33 23 Jl 26
Yearling chinook salmon
Average (kllday) 20 17 23 20 16 18 15 15 28 1 5 13 Range (kradoy) 6-35 5-37 7-44 9-46 8-25 10-24 8-59 6-59 5-)59 1-13 1-68No 111ork group 11 13 10 7 9 5 8 5 38 1 10 18
Coho saloon
Average (kmday) 16 20 18 23 14 17 26 22 28 25 11
Range (kad11y) 6-26 7-57 8-37 7-53 5-25 7-29 16-59 12-59 20-30 2-44No mark group 6 8 7 5 8 7 4 3 8 0 1 12
Steelhea1d
Average (kmday) 21 32 29 34 36 35 44 43 21 Range (krldi1y) J-39 10-61 12-43 18-52 26-45 27-53 31-59 - 20-59 1-62
No rtork group 7 6 4 3 3 5 3 0 24 0 0 10
Al Harked groups representing large releases ()10000) and released at sitilor sites 1977-1983 Not all groups used as indicies were represented oil years several groups ore Dissing for steelheod in 1982 and yearling and subyeorling chinook in 1983
JJ Average fro1 mark groups captured in substantial nu1bers in 1978 and 1979 but all groups weighted by catch for 1980 calculated using dates of aedian fish recapture excluding groups which passed in periods with low effort
sJ Average for all groups recaptured in the ocean calculated fron date of 1st recapture in the ocean within 24 ke of the river mouth
80
(RKm 7) and Clatsop Spit (RKm 9) as were observed from the purse seine at McGowan The dates of capture at McGowan closely represent the dates of migration through the estuary into marine waters Movement patterns for groups released directly into the estuary were not evaluated
The grand average movement rate from Jones Beach to ocean sampling sites for all mark groups of subyearling chinook salmon observed from 1978 to 1980 was 7 slower than the grand average movement rate through the estuary 1978-80 The estimated movement rates for individual mark groups from Jones Beach to seawater were of ten af fee ted by low sampling effort and catch rates in the ocean Marked fish from other salmonid groups were rarely captured in the plume area consequently t movement rate cal culations were not meaningfull Data for mark groups are listed in Dawley et al (1985b)
There is a large data base available describing movement rates for the various species migrating to Jones Beach Intraspecies differences were better defined by separating stocks released upstream from John Day Dam from those released downstream from the dam (RKm 347)
Stocks Downstream from John Day Dam--In 1977 below average flows apparently caused decreased movement rates which increased the duration of migrations be tween release site and Jones Beach For example the migration
middot period ( total days fran date of release to date of median catch) for markedgroups of subyearling chinook salmon captured in August 1977 averaged 170greater than the longest migration period observed for each group from 1978through 1983 (Table 25) average river flows during August 1977 were 21 lessthan the least flow during August 1978-1983 (Dawley et al 1985b)
In 1982 and 1983 above average river flows produced significantly higher movement rates of subyearling chinook salmon (Plt001 t = 287 at 74 df Table 25) than near normal flows during 1978-1981
During normal and high flow years from 1966 to 1972 we found thatsubyearling chinook salmon which migrated the greatest distance moved the fastest (Section I) Data from 1978 to 1983 confirm this however in 1977 when river flow was below average the marked group that migrated the farthest ( fall chi nook salmon from Klickitat Ha tchery-283 km) d splayed the longest migration period and had a very slow movement rate (4 kmday)--apparently related to the exceptionally low river flow
Four factors appear correlated with increased movement rate from release site to Jones Beach for marked subyearling chinook salmon released at sites downstream from John Day Dam size distance of migration river flow and Na+-K+ ATPase enzyme levels in the blood (Zaugg 1981) To eliminate effects on movement rate resulti from variability in the stage of smoltification asindicated by blood Na+-K ATPase without using actual Na+-K+ ATPase values (necessary because data were available for a few marked groups only) we calculated movement rates based on timing of the first 10 of the migrants captured assuming that those rates represented highly smolted fish
Multiple linear regression of movement rates for the tenth percentile fish recovery (Table 25) with size distance traveled and river flow for lower river subyearling chinook salmon provided the relationship
81
Tablemiddot 25 -Release inforaation and Jones Beach recovery inforaation for aarked subyearling chi nook sal1on groups used in correlation analyses of 1ove1ent rate and catch percent to vuiables of fish size recovery date river flobull and spill volume 1977-1983
Rel ease_ i nforaati on __________
River Tag ftoveaent flobull a Flow
IAgD1 1D2gt ______ Recovery_dates_c ____ Rate d Jones adjust Brand ______ Site_ b _____ Size 10th percent 50th percent _ Chday) Recovery Beach recov
lloc Sy1 Rotgt description IRhgt lnolb) Ida 10) (jul I Ida 101 yr) (jul gt 110) ISOU (no)
055BOl 055901 050451 050450 0504144 050646 050714445 051059 59 -- --- ---
091611213 0717108 10
Hatchery 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91
Ifill Falls 208 208
071841 Varisites MillR 264 072055 264 072335 264
0712662 0 07123128 30-34 264 --- -- -- --
091605 071608 072156 072407 LDampRD T 11
2 072663 07 27 29 30
071842 072157 072329 072408 072826 -- -- ---
631802 631942 632255 632156 632462 632032 632503 -- -- ---
OS0420 050421 050528 OS0527 1022111
Hatchery 231 231 231 231
ds Bonn Daa 233 Uaatilla R 467 Hatchery 231 -- --- --
Hatchery 231 231 231 231
Vernita Br 629 --- --- --- --
Hatchery 189 189 189 189 189 189 189
ds Bonn Oaa 230 Asotin 754
ds Bonn Daa 230 Asotin 754
ds Bonn Daa 230 1022110 Lo Sranite Res 699 051023 699 051022 Asotin 754 102515 Clear Creek 868
69 44 43 18 27 70 69 55
74 l211AY 47 8JUN 67
100 75 88 79
91 l511AY 78 611AY 73 30APR BO 2BAPR BO 28APR 92 74 7ftAY
--- -- --
88
75 68 80
100
133 85 77 96 90 98 72
---
84 92 59
60 51 34 38 37 25
3l11AY l8NAY
30JUN l5Jtll
JUL
8JUL
--- ---
2BIIAY
SJUN
132 159
134 126 120 118 87
127
138
181 196
182
189
148
156
m ltcasgtI m fl
Abernathy Sahon Cultural Developaent Center bl
22APR78 l811AY78 611AY79 711AY79
l611AY80 1611AYBOmiddot lftAYBI 3JUN82
l911AY77 l2JUN78 l711AY79 1911AY80 l711AY81 l511AY82 1511AY83
2011AY77 911AY79 IIIAY8l lftAY82 IIIAY82
1011AY82 911AY83
2JUN79 IJUN80
2llAY8I 3JUNB2
l3JUL83
I IJUL78 2AU679 5JULBI 5JUL8I
l4JUL82 26JULB2 6JUL83
3l11AY79 2JUL79
15JUNBO 24JUN80 7JUN8I
16JUNB2 28JUN82 29JUN82 6JUL83
112 138 126 127 137 mmiddot
121 154
101 0105 72 30 0028 92 3S 0090 97 60 o 119 97 18 0091 76 42 0060 76
59 0085 79 1129 0109 110 -- --- -- --
0107 0033 0111 0146 0096 0063 0092 0146
Auasvi lie Stayton Rearing Ponds
139 14 3 163 18 13 137 140 137 135 135
209 1160lf 45 96 0153 83
258 0109 B I 57 0037 76
169 0082 67 204 0081 109 94 0059 92
-- -- ---
0914 0170 0119 0039 0080 0 108 0070
Bonneville Hatchery--Euly Releise
140 16 10 9 0470i 45 0370 129 32 20 128 0167 97 0205 121 27 22 148 0121 79 0130 121 32 20 262 0254 100 0319 121 32 20 794 0383 100 0481 161 137 0138 102 0176 127 so 30 87 0087 104 0112 --
--- --- --- -- --
Bonneville Halchery--Late Re_lease
153 153 141 154 194
192 214 186 186 195 207 187
151 183 166 176 158 167 179 180 187
82
27 19
499 0208 76 56 ooB5 90 57 0092 77
182 0192 110 47 0078 65
--- --- --- ---
Cobullli lz Sahon Hatchery
13 7
33
9
22
20
s 311 0417 3 278 0373
195 0248 15 494 0493
523 0353 136 0526 522 0493
--- -- --- ---
Hageraan Hatchery
15 74 0177 3 0010
34 0084 6 0021
16 67 0132 21 0061
115 0197 84 0156 27 0200
68 36
78 78 91
66
72
36
42
37 91
124 109 122 122 72
0219 0099 0097 0257 0075
0410 0265 0265 0527 om
0508 0501
0126 0008 0060 0025 0193 0081 0284 0225 0203
-------------
_ _Fl ow_ a _Bonnevi l le_Daa __ Total a Total a Spi 11 10 rec 50 rec total ltcasgt lkcasgt ratio g
65 68 62 76 68 68
69 100
40 37 73 73
69
68
61 99
80
3 7 37 62 76 69 69 78 87 78 87
92 93 93
68 82 82 6 1 66
100 57
64 64
36 33 72
82 72 87
104 62 63
J4 68
37 84
85 III 111
100 115 115 63
Table 25--cont
Tag I
Rel ease_i nforaati on River
ftoveaent flow i Flow tAgDlD2l ______ Recovery_dates_c ____ Rate Janes adjust
Brand _____ _si le bl _____ Size 10th percent 50th percent _ tkldall _ Bmm Beach recovtloc Sy1 Rau description IRhl lnolbl tda101 (jull lda10yrl(jull UOll l50XI tnol Ill (tCIS) Ill f --------------
6311745 --- --- --
072836 --- --- --
632160
054301 055601 050446 050639
Hatchery 568 --- -- --- ---
Deschutes R 506 --- --- --- --
Lewis Rmiddot 146 --- -- --- --
Hatchery 269 269 269 269
050740485051 269 051050 -- --- ---
05144454901
269 ---
Hatchery 269 0550011 RD U 4 ds Bonn Dae 230 0560016201 055401 05 04 34 44 050640 050714149 0510515354 050851 051057 051142 43 RDampLD U l --- --
054601 0557101 050433 050641 564809 0507142 0507146 0507143 051052 --- --
---
--
050339 40 41 050445 050642 --- ---
631640 6317163 631801
--
Hatchery 269 230 269 269 269 269
Uaatilla R 467 467
Hatchery 269 ds Bonn DH 230 --- --- ---
Hatchery
---
269 269 269 269
ds Bonn DH 230 Hatchery 269
Rod Creek 368
--
368 Hatchery 269 --- -- ---
Hatchery 269 269 269
Hatchery 160 160 160
631854 194154 I 160
35
19
148 24JUL --- --- ---
111 l6APR 104 29NAR 125 281tAR 123 181tAR 99 2APR
ll0 29IIAR -- -- ---
86 17APR 83 l7APR 64 24APR 19 25APR 78 28APR 83 17APR 71 23APR 72 20APR 79 79 54 311AY 64 711AY --- -- ---
42 3011AY 56 22NAY 50 2llAY 51 lllAY 45 221tAY 65 911AY 75 75 49 2311AY
--- -- ---
16 22AU6 19 17AU6 19 10AU6
--- -- -
ll7 l7JUL 98 27JUH 72 l6JUL
160 2JUL
l4JUL78
8JUN83
206 5AU680
106 5AY77
88 15APR78 87 7APR79 78 26IIAR80 92 4APR80 88 15APR82
107 30APR77 107 1IIAY77 114 111AY78 115 l11AY78 118 31AY79 10B 24APR80 113 2BAPR81 110 25APRB2
411AY82 7KAY82
123 51AY83 127 BIIAY83
150 3lIAY77 142 2411AY78 141 221tAY79 132 131AY80 143 24IIAY80 129 11MY81
lBIIAYBl 23NAY81
143 251AY82
234 25AU678 229 19AU679 223 13AU680
198 5AU677 178 5JUL78 197 30JUL78 183 12JUL79
195
159
218 ---
11
Ringold Rearing Pond
24 ---
0065 68 --- --- ---
Round Butte Hatchery
45 0210 -- --- ---
Speel yai Hatchery
5 197 0292
106
40 - --- --- --- ---
0064
0274
0218
Spring Creek Hatchery--N1rch Release
125 105 97 86 94
105 ---
7 4 25 8
25 12 25 13
25 21 49 10
--- ---
169 Ol9lif 47 174 0153 77 229 0174 64
123 0201 40 92 0096 62
106 0099 104 -- --- --- ---
0154 0162 0165 0150 0089 0128
Spring Creek Hatchery--April Release
120 22 8 121 26 7 121 33 16 121 32 14 123 25 16 115 28 17 118 25 17 115 39 21 124 127 125 39 31 128 39 26 --- -- ---
638 0416 47 304 0627 47 328 0213 88 201 0249 88 477 0258 88 108 0299 73 113 0126 65
223 o 196 94
48 0103 100 106 0105 102 109 0108 96 115 0110 104
--- -- --- ---
0335 0504 0246
02B7 0297 0307 0121 0236 0129 0134 0132 0142
Spring Creek Hatchery-Nay Release
151 34 27 144 52 31 142 61 47 134 86 55 144 39 33 131 49 32 138 143 237 65 41 --- -- ---
42 0092i 5 l 106 0088 87 98 0087 84
55 0129 88 71 0080 Bl
105 0171 72
--
56 0046 67 10 ooso 17
73 0128 119 --- -- ---
0077 0101 0097 o 149 0087 0174 0045 OOSJ
0181
Spring Creek Hatchery--August Release
237 49
230 49
226 65
217 5 186 11 211 10 193 6
83
32 19 0043 33 33 0181 32 9 0144
-- -- -- --
Toutle Hatchery
3 606 0658 7 457 0559 4 164 0267 3 866 0822
39 0032 32 0123 37 0104
34 0457 61 0516 45 0210 40 0612
_ _Flow_ i_Bonnevi I le_Daa __ Total a Total a Spi II lOX rec Uusgt
3 I 65
57
49
82
31 31 67 67 67 48
54
91
87 93
42 79 73 eo
72 65
108
35 29 36
29 64
53 37
501 rec tohl lkcas) ratio 9
64
31
3 7
40 7 l53 38 49 83 ---
40 40 78 7B62 S9 54
78 87 92 87 93 ---
42 79 73 80 72 65
61 66
108 ---
35 29 l4
ooo
030 015 022 017 057
-- ---
000
040
010 ooo
004 034 ooo
ooo
016
--- ---
021 041 040 045
044
ooo
ooo
044 -- ---
ooo
000 012
--- -- ---
31 57 42 36
Table 25-cont
Rfmg_inforaalion
River Tag sect lloveaent flow a Flow
(AgD1 1 D21 ______ Recovery dales_c __ Rate d Jones adjust Brand ____ Site b ____ Size 10th percent 50th percent _ O1dayl _ Recovery Beach recov
(Loe Sy1 Roll description IRhl lnolbl Ida 101 (jul I Ida 10 1 yrl (jul I ( IOU (5011 (nol m lkmlg m f
631655 631639 6317146 631957 632105 632036 632460 --- --- ---
631605 631663 631949 631947 6312008 632157 -- -- --
050427 050426 102218 -- --- --
054701 050346 47 48 0503434445 0503SS 56157 050448
(150449 050643 05071474950 050435 36
Hatchery 141 141 141 141 141 141 l4l
Hatchery 358 358 358 358 358 358
ds Bonn Da 230 Clear Creek B68
868 --- - ---
Hatchery 261 261 261 261 261 261 261 261 261
--- --- --- ---
631742 632006 632254 632463 --- --- ---
Hatchery 127 127 127 127
631741 ds Priest Rap Daa 639 631821 639 6320l7 639 631948 639 632261 639 632155 639 632456 639 632252 639 6326ll 639
6326112 639
76 2JUL 113 5Jlll 108 19JUL 180 8JUL 115 26JUN 119 26NAY 130 14JUN --- -- --
92 4JUL 87 21JUN 80 B5 3JUN 78 12JUN 83
--- -- --
40 16NAY 40 36
122 llJUN 115 mAY 135 IJUN 100 24Jlll 105 29JUH 123 lJUL 101 16JUN 94 9JUN 93 7JUN
--- --- ---
61 3UIAY 150 7JUN 100 4JUN 117 l5JUN --- --middot --
124 74 77 BB
67 115 67
87 84 63
1B3 14JUL77 186 26JUL77 199 3AU678 189 27JUL79 178 12JUL80 146 311AYBI 165 7JUL82
1B5 l9AU677 172 7JUL7B
7JUN79 154 9JUNB0 163 IBJUN81
13JUNB2
136 2111AY79 16JUN79 18JUH81
162 2lJUN77 151 7JUN78 152 BJUN78 205 31JUL78 180 3WL79 182 4JUL79 168 19JUNBO 157 llJUN81 158 10JUNB2
151 SJUN78 158 llJUN80 155 19JUNBl 166 25JUNB2
26JUL78 mum
30JUL79 4JUL80 7JUL81 9AU68l
23JUNB2 5JUL82
17JUN83 20JUL83
195 207 215 208 193 151 188
23 1B8 158 161 169 164
141 167 169
172 158 159 212 184 185 171
162 161
156 166 170 176
207 198 211 186 188 221 174 217 168 201
84
B 6
10 4
17
17
17
10 21
42 47
14
Kalaa Falls Hatchery
3 131 0207 31 2 697 0718 29 3 541 0631 45
2 2229 1429 38 4 163 0239 53 8 175 0117 90 3 185 0153 110
--- --- --- --- --
Klickitat Hatchery
4 38 oo59t 32 12 97 0169
224 0127 24 64 0066 30 30 0032
214 0111 --- --- --- ---
Kooskia Hatchery
9 38 0117 31 0062 ll 0043
61 42 90
112 109
84
55 112
-- -- --- --
Li ltle While Sal1on Hatchery
7 6 267 0127i 36 32 14 330 0358 79
27 13 334 0348 79 17 10 61 0109 45
28 17 254 02l0if 42 22 16 412 0223 42
32 22 94 0073 91 38 28 164 0072 124 38 21 267 0136 102
--- --- --- --- --- --middot
lower KalaH Hatchery bl
18 136 0136 79 8 209 0195 91 4 175 0133 112 6 191 0162 126
--- --- --- --- ---
Priest Rapids Spabulling Channel
20 0055 51 12 0045 4 l 6 0025 36
II 002B 57 13 0083 78 33 0073 55 35 0099 126 93 0073 110
141 0096 93 B6 0103 75
0138 0468 0497 1040 0204 0137 0205
0040 0156 0097 0077 0043 0148
0131 0054 0058
0090 0385 0375 0086 0160 0170 00B6 0105 0173
0146 0230 0180 0239
0046 0034 0018 0025 0089 0064 0146 009B 0ll50107
_ _Flow_i Bonnevi I l_Daa __ Tot ill a Total a Spi 11 10 rec lkcasl
24 24 53 37 68
B2 100
24 74
82 108
40
67 67 47
44 44 84
III95
6 7 83
111100
50 rec tohl Uusl ratio g
28 26 42 34 49
101 104
29 ooo
57 042 56 035 83 050 99 059
100 031 -- --- ---
73 50 99
32 73 73 47
37 37 85
10e95 --- ---
73 84
99 115
47 27 33 52 72 51
117 104 85
67
ooo
045
045 021 002 002 051 057 038 ---
Table 25--continued
b
S_
=_I
il
JJI
E_
More complete information available from Dawley et al 1985b or releasing agency Table 21 Binary coded wire tags Ag=Agency Dl=Data 1 code and D2=Data 2 code Color coded wire tags begin with WH and each two digits thereafter represent a color Brands are represented by the following Loc=Location fish Sym=Brand symbol and Rot=Rotation of symbol For abbreviations symbols and descriptions see Dawley et al 1985b
Abbreviations are listed Bonn=Bonneville Br=Bridge D=Dam ds=downstream Lo=Lower R=River Rap=Rapid Res=Reservoir Vad=Various and Will=Willamette
Julian date that 10th percentile or 50th percentile (median) fish were captured at Jones Beach calculated from adjusted daily recovery Assessment limited to groups showing data
Movement rate from release site to Jones Beach for 10th percentile and 50th percentile fish captured at Jones Beach calculated from adjusted daily recovery Assessment limited to groups showing data
Flow at Bonneville Dam (from CofE) and Willamette Lewis and Cowlitz Rivers (from US Geological Survey) average for week of median fish recovery
Adjusted to represent flows at 7000 m3
second (70 kcms) flow adjustedcatch = catch x [1 + (kcms at Jones Beach - 70) x 0085] Assessment limited to groups showing data
Spillway flow at Bonneville Dam total flow at Bonneville Dam averages from week of median fish recovery at Jones Beach
Close proximity to the sampling site caused anomalous movement rate observations--data not used in correlation
1977 catch data are beach seine expanded to represent beach seine plus purse seine by using the average ratios of purse seine to beach seine catch of that fish stock from years 1978-1983
85
log (movement rate)= 1034 - 00106(size--nolb) + 000646(distance--RKm
of release site)+ 0133 (flow--1000 m3second) and Ri = 066 F = 7703
at 2 74 df with P lt 0001
The equation is given in the original data units but the statistics were calculated using normalized units Movement rates for groups which migrated through Bonneville reservoir were poorly correlated with both date of recovery (r = 006) and with the proportion of spill volume to total discharge at Bonneyille Dam (r = 010)
Though movement rates for subyearling chinook salmon generally increased with fish size the largest fish within a mark group did not necessarily migrate more rapidly than smaller fish Increasing and decreasing trends of daily mean length were observed within various mark groups examples of each are presented in Figure 29 coho salmon data are presented in Figure 30 Previous observations of smolt behavior indicated that the larger fish within a population migrated faster than the smaller fish ( Shapovalov and Taft 1954 Salo and Bayliff 1958 and earlier data on coho and subyearling chinook salmon in this report)
From 1977 to 1983 lower river stocks of yearling fish were not well represented by marked groups Marked fish were released for specific tests of culture treatment structural bypass effects andor date and release sites Therefore trends in movement rates could not be examined for the general salmonid population
Stocks Upstream from John Day Dam--In 1977 many juvenile steelhead and chinook salmon (possibly 50 of the run) stopped their seaward migration upstream from Lower Granite Dam on the Snake River because of low river flows and no water spill at dams (Park et al 1978) Recovery of marked fish during estuarine sampling in the fall winter and spring of 1977-1978 indicated that few individuals successfully migrated in the fall or endured overwintering to migrate the following year only 13 marked fish released in the Snake River during 1977 were captured in late 1977 or 1978
Evaluation of the influence of river flow on movement rates of the fish that migrated from the upper river in 1978-83 was limited to subyearling and yearling fish captured marked and released in the tailrace of McNary Dam (RKm 470) Other groups were not included because of (1) extensive migration in tributaries or areas of the Columbia River where a single river flow would not accurately represent the conditions of migration or (2) effects of transportation from Lower Granite Little Goose or McNary Dams (Park et al 1984) Flow measurements at Bonneville Dam generally represent conditions from McNary through Bonneville Dams but have little relationship to flows in the Columbia River above McNary Dam or in the Snake River
Movement rates of yearling fish from McNary Dam to Jones Beach were higher than those of subyearling fish (means = 62 and 32 km day respectively) therefore the data could not be combined Movement rates of steelhead and yearling chinook salmon were not statistically different (Plt005) and were combined for analysis
86
C
-5
95
90
85
80
75
20
15
10
5
FALL CHINOOK SALMON
1981 Oonnevlle Hatchery
O Puue Seine
bull Beach Seine
5 10 -------------June----
90
E S 85
c 75al
FALL CHINOOK SALMON
1981 Little White Salmon Hatchery
i 79mm
70 _ ___ ____ ___ _____ ___ __ ____ __ ____ ---14-L ___ _
-5
a
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
5 10 15 20
June
o Purse Seine
bull Beach Seine
Figure 29--Daily beach and purse seine catches and mean fork lengths for two marked groups of subyearling chinook salmon at Jones Beach one showing decrease and the other increase in fork lengths
with date
87
middot COHO SALMON
BONNEVILLE HATCHERY 1981
150
140 c
deg 130 ] 120 0
LL
ii 138 mm
110 -----------------1---L---J
20 Clgt
g
E
5 c 10
- GJ u
i5 0 lt(
150 E S 140 -5 130
Y
6 120 LL
- 10
E
5
10 15 May
COHO SALMON
WASHOUGAL HATCHERY 1981
c 5
0 lt( 21
o Purse seine
bull Beach seine
20 25 30
o Purse seine
bull Beach seine
5 10 June-
-
Figure 30--Daily beach and purse seine catches and mean fork lengths for
two marked groups of coho salmon at Jones Beach one showing
decrease and the other increase in fork lengths with date
88
Movement rates of yearling and subyearling salmonids were not well correlated with river flow A linear model was developed for data from yearling fish [movement rate (kmday) = 3525 + 31 x flow (1000 m3second)(Fig 31) however correlation was not high for the 27 groups evaluated r = 0 45 Movement rates for subyearling chinook salmon (mos Uy summer chinook salmon from the mid-Columbia River which migrate during July-September) showed little correlation (r = 019) with flow (Fig 31) Variability between the 20 marked groups examined was high and the slope was not significantly different from zero (Plt005) Likewise no correlation of movement to flow was observed by Millr and Sims (1983) for subyearling fish migrating between McNary and John Day Dams bull
Variability of Catch
To make conclusions regarding differences in catch rate be tween time periods or be tween fish groups it is necessary to understand the variables affecting each Catches at Jones Beach were examined in relation to time of day river flow and size of fish also catch percentages of replicate groups were compared to develop a base line of expected variation from sampling marked fish
Diel Patterns --Diel movement patterns were examined to partially assess the consistency of catch data to determine if morning sampling (7 h beginning at sunrise) was representative of juvenile migrations throughout the day
We evaluated catch per set in relation to hour and tidal flue tua tion during five 24-h periods in 1978 and 1980 Catches indicated that movement patterns of juvenile salmonids were generally consistent (Fig 32) However patterns were different than reported for other river systems and different portions of the Columbia River (Thrower et al 1985)
Diel sampling indicated that the periods during the day and the lateral locations in the river which grossed the largest catches of migrating salmonids were as follows sunrise to early afternoon near shore for subyearling chinook salmon sunrise to early afternoon in mid-river for yearling chinook salmon (catches fluctuated in relation to the origin of the fish and other variables) mid-morning to late afternoon near shore and early morning to early afternoon in mid-river for coho salmon noon to early evening in mid-river for steelhead and daylight in mid-river for sockeye salmon ( too few were cap tu red to discriminate be tween hours of catch) Decreased movement during darkness was indicated for all salmonids No relationship between tide cycle and catch was apparent for el ther beach or purse seine sampling detailed analysis is presented by Thrower et al (1985)
Catch patterns observed during the five 24-h sampling periods were compared with patterns from 7 hday sampling from 1979 through 1983 Generally the curves representing percent of total catch per day by set were similar in shape (Fig 33) More fluctuation is apparent for diel sampling than for morning sampling primarily because of sample size Initial beach seine sets during morning-only sampling captured a greater proportion of fish
89
0 0 (0
+- C
gt0
120
100
80
60
40
20
bull
bull
Yearling Steelhead and Chinook Salmon
- bull- Subyearling Chinook Salmon
bull bull bull
bull
-
bull
3525 + 31 4)( y ---r = o45
bull
A ----
A ----J A A
A
- ---
6 - - - - y = 444 -1 98
----middot X bull bull
bull
- --bull r==-019 -
bull
o-----=--------L----1----1---L---J_--- 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
River flow ( 1000 m 3 second)
Figure 31--Movement rates in relation to river flow for mark groups of yearling and subyearling salmonids released in the tailrace of McNary Dam and recovered at Jones Beach
1978-1983
c
0
0
0
C
0
C
Q
BEACH SEINE 10
Subyearling Chinook Salmon n = 13513
8
0545 Sunrise
1200
BEACH SEINE 10
Coho Salmon n = 1092
8
6
4
0545 Sunrise
1200
1 t0O 2045 2400 Sunset
1800 2045 2400 Sunset
20 PURSE SEINE
Yearling Chinook Salmon n = 2029
15
0545 Sunrise
1200 1800 2045 2400 Sunset
Time
A
C
E
0500
0500
0500
20
15
10
5
20
PURSE SEINE 12461
Subyearling Chinook Salmon n = 1461
0545 Sunrise
Daylight
1200
PURSE SEINE
Coho Salmon n = 3990
1800 2045 2400 Sunet
0545 Sunrise
1200 1800 2045 2400 Sunset
20 PURSE SEINE
Steelhead
n = 4673
0545 Sunrise
1200 1800 2045 2400 Sunset
Time
8
0500
D
0500
F
0500
Figure 32--Diel catch patterns for chinook salmon coho salmon and steelhead from beach and purse seine sampling at Jones
Beach 1978-1980
91
CUMULATIVE YEARS
cu-cu
30 SUBYEARLING CHINOOK SALMON
20
10
0 __ _ _____ _
40 SUBY EARLING CHINOOK SALMON
u 30
-
c 20
bullbull
40 YEARLING CHINOOK SALMON
30
20
middot
10 ______ _ _____ 0600 0900 1200
Hours
o--o Beach Seine 189 d -- Purse Seine 145 d
A-middotmiddotmiddotmiddotmiddotbull Diel Sampling 3 d
30 COHO SALMON
20
10
middot + +
40 COHO SALMON
40 STEELHEAD (46)
30
20
10 _______ ____ 0600 0900
Hours
1200
Figure 33--Means and 95 confidence limits for percentage of total catch by 45- or 90-minute intervals from morning sampling 1979-1983 compared to meanpercentages from diel sampling at the same time of day 1978-1980chinook and coho salmon and steelhead captured with beach and purseseines at Jones Beach
92
middot t
(relative percent catch per time interval) than in diel sampling because fish accumulated in the sampling area at night and increased morning-only catches but were cleared out in earlier sets during diel sampling Only data from days with maximum effort ( 10 beach seine or 5 purse seine sets) during the peak of migration (May and June) were used for evaluation Means and 95 confidence bands for percent of daily catch by time interval were computed for each year 1979-1983 These catch patterns were then compared with a pattern developed from the aggregate of 1979-1983 data Variations within years were not large thus confidence bands of catch percentages for daily set intervals were small enough to show significant differences between sets for each species (Fig 33)
It appears that diel movement behavior of fish at Jones Beach was consistent and that representative samples of most fish groups passing into the estuary were obtained during one 7-hour portion (morning) of the day Exceptions that showed erratic patterns of migration were fish groups that passed the site in 3 days or less (discussed later)
River Flow--Two indirect evaluations were made to assess effects of river flows on juvenile catch percentages from 1977 to 1983 (1) the ratio of subyearling chinook salmon captured to the number released from hatcheries each year was compared to seasonal average river flow and (2) catch percentages from mark groups of similar fish released at different dates were compared to differences of flow at recovery
The first evaluation of effects from river flow indicated that 76 of the variability of catch percentage between groups was attributable to river flow (Table 26) The linear relationship (Fig 34) fljom regression analysis was Y (catch percent) = 0622 - 0039 (Flow--1000 m secod) r = -087 Usingthis model an increase in flow from 6000 to 7000 m second results in a 101 decrease in catch Assumptions are (1) survival for the subyearling chinook salmon population reared at hatcheries was the same for all years (2) average river flow for the season appropriately represented the conditionsencountered by most fish and (3) wild subyearling chinook salmon populationsimmigrating from tributaries downstream from Bonneville Dam were a constantpercentage of the catch during all years River flow data were an average ofthe daily cumulative flow for the Columbia River at Bonneville Dam obtainedfrom the US Army7 p
orps of Engineers ( 1977-1983) and the Willamette Lewisand Cowlitz River 30 April-1 July
The second evaluation involved comparisons between catch percentages of similar fish groups (same body size and stock) released at the same site on different dates To limit variations from survival differences related to passage conditions at dams only groups which did not pass through Snake River or Columbia River dams were selected for comparison The aggregation of data
IJ Data obtained from the US Geoglogical Survey 847 NE 19th Ave Suite 300 Portland OR 97232
93
Table 26--Numbers of subyearling chinook salmon reared annually at hatcheries in the Columbia River basin numbers and percent of total subyearling chinook salmon captured in the beach seine at Jones Beach and seasonal average river flows 1977-1983
1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982
No released fro hatcheries (millions) 823 757 811 63 1 664 645
No captured at Jones Beach ( thousands) 381 263 303 131 139 154
Percent capturedpound 046 036 039 023 022 025
River flow thoumfrac34Y 40 80 70 85 95 111
1983
639
122
019
98
lt bull
a Data obtained from Idaho Department of Fish and Game Oregon Department ofFish and Wildlife US Fish and Wildlife Service and Washington Department of Fisheries Only fish released upstream from Jones Beach were included Those from Priest Rapids spawning channel Ringold Wells spawning channel and Hagerman Hatchery were omitted as these groups are almost exclusively purse seine captured
b The following adjust ment of catches was used to standardize effort levelsbetween years (weekly average catch per set x 70 cumulative for the period 9 April-30 September each year Catch per set numbers are listed in Dawley et al (1985a)
c A constant percentage of wild fish within the catch year was assumed andthe error from not including an estimated number was ignored
d Average from daily measurements of the Columbia River at Bonneville DamWillamette River Lewis River and Cowlitz River 30 April-1 July (calculated from data provided by u s Army Corps of Engineers NPD PO Box 2870 Portland OR 97208 and US Geological Survey PO Box 3202 Portland OR 97208
94
0 V
C
070
060
050
040
S 030
c tJ
u
020
010
0 i
y = -0039x + 0622
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Columbia River flow at Jones Beach (thousand m3 sl
Figure 34--Subyearling chinook salmon catch at Jones Beach as percent of total hatchery release number by year middotplotted against seasonal average flow 1977-1983
(Table 27) shows an inverse correlation between river flow and catch percentage Increased flow resulted in decreased catch percentages in 59 of marked groups (276) Groups which showed changes of catch percentage greater than 99 per I 000 m3 second were assumed to be erroneous and were deleted from the data base The overall mean ( X) decrease of catch percentage for a 1000 m3 second increase of river flow was 2 3 These data produced a relatively large standard deviation (SD) of 28 Data were reexamined to determine if variance could be decreased by separating the data into categories of low medium and high flow or small moderate and large changes of flow andor by species Categorizing had little effect on variation Mjans and standard deviation for decrease of percentage catch for a 1000m second flow increase were almost identical for subyearling chinook yearling chinook and coho salmon (X = 16 28 and 25 and SD = 282 287 and 268 respectively) A single linear relationship over the entire range of flow was used because change of catch percentage per incremental flow change was not correlated with range of flow volume
Limiting the data set to include only catches from similar mark groups captured under conditions of large flow changes(gt 3000 m3second) produced a more consistent data set for evaluation of effects of fljw on catchpercentage mean 6 8 decrease of catch percentage per 1000 m second flow increase with a SD of 13 7 from 70 comparisons (Table 28) Differences of means among species using the more limited data set were not statistically significant at P lt 005
At this time adult recovery data available for these comparison groups (23 sets) show high variability Table 28) and are insufficient to evaluate
precision of flow relationship to juvenile catches
The two evaluations indicate that increased river flow causes decreased catches of subyearling chinook salmon and yearling migrants in the beach and purse seines No difference could be detected between species or between dfferent flow ranges We used a linear catch decrease of 8 5 per 1000 m second increase of flow (average of 101 and 68) to standardize catch data for comparison of mark groups of fish captured under different flows
Fish Size and Location of Sampling--Most yearling salmonids were captured in mid-river during purse seine sampling and the majority of subyearlings were captured near shore during beach seine sampling However there were exceptions (1) through mid-April each year yearling chinook salmon were captured primarily in the beach seine (2) coho salmon released in early May at sites close to Jones Beach ( lt100 km) were often captured in the beach seine and (3) large(lt 50 fishlb) subyearling chinook salmon and those which migrated long distance (gt 250 km) were of ten cap tu red in the purse seine The ratios of beach seine to purse seine catch in May June and July at Jones Beach were 1 3 for yearling chinook salmon 1 35 for coho salmon 141 for steelhead and 171 for subyearling chinook salmon The average size of marked and unmarked fish recovered in the beach seine were smaller than those captured with the purse seine--5 to 10 mm for yearling fish and 10 to 20 mm for subyearling fish (Dawley et al 1985a and b)
96
Table 27-- Marked groups used to evaluate catch percentages of marked fish in
relation to flow 1977-1983 -------------
------------------------------------------------------------
---
-----
-------- Fele11se Inform1tion o fog b
(AgD17Dl Jones Beach BMnd Size Sourcestock cl Number [tale c11tch d Flow el
(Loe S111 Fiot) nolb lttreotmentr ___ _(thou)_jdolrtoYl nol m (kc11s1_
072507 072426 072828
--- --- ---
091605 071608 07216 072407 072729 072730
--- --- ---
071842 072329 072408
--- --- ---
631802 631942 632156 632255 632032 632462 632503
--- --- ---
631639 631746 631957 632105 632036 632460
--- --- ---
631742 632006 632254 632463
-- --- ---
0550018 RD U 4
055401 --- --- --
631640 631763 631941
--- --- ---
631641 631803 631938 631946 632153 632251 632461
--- --- ---
0716S7 071736 072140 072701
--- --- ---
071661 071733 072143 072547
-- - ---
Subyeorling Chinook S1bon
35 Bonneville Hat 1022 40 Late foll (Well W35-44lb) 1050 44 I 990 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
78 Bonnevil 1 e Hal 1832 78 Tille (Well woter production) 966 76 I 1300 80 1059 74 526
474 --- --- --- --- --- ---
88 Bonneville Hat j 2879 85 Tule (Tonner Cr) 757
30 Jul 81 03 Aug 82 01 Aug 83 --- ---
05 tlay 77 01 May 79 24 Apr 81 23 Apr 82 04 May 83
---
--- --- ---
01-29 May 79 12 May 81
50 91 39 ---
409 128 148 262 40 47 ---
499 57
80 I 968 21Hay-04Jun 82 182 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
133 Co1litz Hot 1460 19 Jun 78 311 85 ( p rodbulliction) 1204 27 Jun 79 78 84 I 1532 12-28 Jun 81 195
1213 49494 413 24Jun-08Jul 82 136
1992 523 72 1502 06-25 Jun 83 522
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
113 Kalama Falls Hat 1457 22 Jun 77 697 108 (prod1iction) 1505 12 Jul 78 541 180 I 2097 22JJJn-13Jul79 2229115 1004 13-24 Jun 80 163 119 1754 22-28 H1y 81 175 130 1632 10Jun-17Jul 82 185
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --
61 Lo Kaliro Hit 1297 30 Hay 78 136 150 iproduction) 1445 06 Jun 80 209 100 I 1553 01-11 Jun 81 175 117 1394 13-25 Jun 82 191
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- -- ---
83 Spring CrHat ds BonnD 761 11 Apr 77 304 (79-83 lb)
79 I 982 20 Apr 78 201 --- --- --- --- --- --- -- --- --
117 To11Ue Hot 1325 29 Jun 77 606 98 (production) 1428 19 Jun 78 457
160 I 1321 17 Jun 79 794 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -- ---
64 Washougal Hot 1286 28 Jun 77 188 62 (production) 1514 26 Jun 78 212 95 I 937 14 Jun 79 296
1588 589 80 3192 30 Jun BO 609 71 2773 26-30 Jun 81 41790 1679 28 Jun 82 427
016 55 020 63 013 52 --- --- ---
047 f 4S o 17 - 97012 79025 100 009 104
--- --- ---
021 76 009 77 019 110 --- --- ---
042 68 039 36 040 78
037 73
049 72 --- --- ---
072 fl 29 066 - 45 140 3B 034 53 012 109 o 16 100 --- --- --
013 79 020 91 014 112 017 122 --- --- ---
063 f_ 47
024 aa-- --- --
074 f 34 057- 61 082 40 --- --- --
023 f 30 026 - 57 045 48
034 48 025 78 041 97
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -- --- --- -- ---
Yearling Chinook Salnon
7 Bonneville Hot 479 13 Hir 79 105 038 73 6 Tule (Well water) 481 13 Mor 80 52 022 49 7 I 519 17 Hu 82 52 043 93 7 375 08 Hor 83 44 023 139
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -- --- --- --- ---
8 Bonneville Hot 327 13 Hor 79 62 041 73 7 late frill (Well w1ter) 49J 13 Hor 80 70 033 49 7 I 506 17 Nor 82 48 038 121 6 499 23 Hor 83 13 005 100
-- --- --- --- -- --- --- -- -- -- -- --- --
97
lt l
C
bull
Table 27--continued (
WHLBGN amp 20 Ccrson Hot 410 03 Hay 79 28 ooa 97 ltLA AN 4) (hoiing)
050437 19 I 821 28 Apr 80 38 007 aa--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -- --- --- --- ---
631711 5 Cowlitz Hat 583 08 Hor 78 77 045 72 631712 ltDensity 6 lbgQlin) 570 85 631817 6
I 241 23 Apr 79 35 019 64 631818 243 34 632134 8 (Erythromyin control 240 01 Apr 82 9 006 104 632311 5-6 lbg1lr1in) 244 11 632505 6 (Adult arrival tining 730 04 Apr 83 18 oos 91 632506 5-6 lbgalrin gt 775 26 632609 583 11
-- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -- --- --- --- ---
091658 15 Eaale Creek Hot 972 24 r 78 53 007 a1 071747 13 (prodbullJction) 462 01 ay 79 39 011 81 071748 483 51
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -- --- --- --- ---
091661 16 Marion Fks Hot Hinto 486 13-15 H11r 78 17 007 72091662 C11rson stock 459 22 091663 502 17 071725 16 497 03-05 Apr 79 32 008 97 071726 496 21 071729 450 37 072249 14 503 16-23 Har 81 10 004 65 072250 497 7 072251 471 7 072525 16 506 15-17 Miu 82 12 004 94 072526 507 13 072527 49S 26
--- --- -- -- --- --- --- --- --- --- -- --- --- --- --- --
091701 12 lforion Fks Hill Hinto 491 13-1S lfar 78 28 oos 80 091702 SontioD stock (12-17lb 496 22 091703 501 45 071731 17 494 03-05 Apr 79 36 009 97 071732 506 38 072252 14 397 16-24 Hor 81 10 005 65 072253 422 10 072528 15 soo 18-22 Har 82 14 oos 100072529 495 22 072530 492 20
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -- --- --- --- ---
071730 19 Marion Fks Hot e Minto 482 03-05 r 79 29 008 97 072254 20 S1ntiQ11 stock (19-20lb) 483 16-18 ir 81 7 003 79
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -- --- --- ---
072053 11 HcKenzie Hot 349 15 Hor 80 13 ooa 58 072222 9 ltGroded-1J1ediu1) 360 16 tlor 81 11 ooe 62 072518 11 I 342 15 Hor 82 2 001 94 072i20 10 300 14 tfor 83 15 010 77
-- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -- --- --- -- --
072048 3 McKenzie Hat 311 15 Hor 80 18 015 58 072220 4 ltGr11ded-lilrge) 356 16 Hor 81 11 007 62 072516 3 I 363 15 Har 82 2 001 100 072718 4 362 14 Kor 83 9 006 120
--- --- --- --- --- --- -- --- -- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
072051 4 McKen zie Hilt 294 15 Har 80 13 011 58 072217 6 ltUngraded) 302 16 Har 81 4 003 62 072054 4 I 325 15 Har 82 4 003 96 072522 6 321 14 Har 83 4 002 91
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
071741 14 Oakridge Hat Dexter 320 19-20 Har 79 40 017 69 072040 16 ( Griided-saiall) 309 10-11 ttir 80 18 013 5t8 072420 14 I 295 15 Mar 82 6 004 116
--- --- --- --- --- --- -- --- --- --- --- --- --- -- --- --- --- ---
071742 8 Oaridge Hat Dexter 295 20 Hor 79 50 026 69 072042 9 ( Graded-11ediu11) 307 10-11 Har 80 20 o14 58072307 8 I 317 16 Har 81 17 010 56 072305 299 14 072422 9 309 15-16 Har 82 5 003 116
-- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -- -- --- --- --- ---
071744 6 Oakridge Hat Dexter 328 20 Mor 79 36 031 73 072046 4 (Gr1ded-lilrge) 290 10 Hor 80 15 015 49 072303 4
I 312 16 Hor 81 12 011 62 072419 5 307 15 Hor 82 8 010 96
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -- -- --- --- --- --
98
4
Table 27--continued
071743 12 OokridQe Hat Dexter 302 20 Hor 79 32 018 69
072044 8 ltUngraded) 307 10 tfQr 80 25 019 58 072225 7 I 266 16 Mor 81 9 006 65 072513 7 274 15 Har 82 7 007 93
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -- --- -- --- --- ---
091621 8 s S1ntiam Hat 250 13-15 Har 78 10 009 79 091622 (prod1Jction 295 5 091626 149 11 071945 5 294 14 Hor 80 23 019 49 071946 299 19
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -- --- --- --- --- ---
091623 9 s S11ntia1 Hot 269 13-15 liilr 78 30 024 79 091624 (Below Willios fills) 246 25 091625 134 12 071947 6 321 13-14 Hu 80 36 028 49 071948 10 C
ut J 30 --- --- -- --- --- --- --- --- --- -- --- --- ---
Coho S1hon
07 1908 23 Cascade Hat Tanner Cr 279 07 Hay 79 18 007 81 071911 01siy re lease) 269 18 071963 24 bull 292 28 r 80 13 ooa 76072127 17 249 06 ay 81 24 011 67 072130 267 28
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
071907 23 C1scade Hilt Tonner Cr 272 07 Jun 79 37 014 55 071910 (Late H 11y-June rele1se) 259 36 072128 17 I 279 08 Jun 81 21 010 124 072131 261 25 072429 18 277 25 May 82 25 010 110 072433 282 30 072747 19 431 24 tloy 83 21 006 122
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
071909 23 Cascade Hat Tanner Cr 246 06 Jul 79 50 044 40 071912 (Ju ly rele1se) 2s2 56 072129 17 I 277 06 Jul 81 13 014 76 072132 289 19
--- --- --- --- --- --- -- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --
632430 20 Cowlitz H1t 106 03 Hay 82 17 016 119 632431 (Density 116-117 lbgalmin) 106 13 632432 102 16 632433 104 17 632434 105 18 632628 20 102 03 May 83 19 018 99 632629 103 16 632630 104 17 632631 102 17 632632 106 17
-- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
091657 15 Eagle Creek Hat 747 24 J 78 95 017 87 071746 18 (Density 045 lbcu ftingt 693 22 ay 79 128 022 62 050826 14 bull 1268 22 r 81 180 018 67051039 16 683 06 ay 82 114 018 110 051040 666 115 051133 15 605 04 Hay 83 78 013 92 051134 628 76
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
632303 17 Lower kaloma Hat 528 03 May 82 89 017 109 632605 17 (Density 11-115 lbg13l1in) 520 04 Hoy 83 53 010 92
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
091649 15 S1ndy Hot 340 04 H11y 78 21 oos s1091650 (nutrition) 333 24 091651 344 19 091652 330 22 071749 19 275 01 Hay 79 28 013 81 071750 274 071751 275 32 071752 279 28
99
lt
Table 27--continued
072031 18 Sandy Hot 252 01 Moy 80 16 012 76 072033 (n1Jtritionl 252 15 072032 254 16 072034 252 21 072035 259 12 072036 245 20 072037 260 15 07203S 265 20 072259 18 299 01 Moy 81 34 009 72 072262 278 25 072260 281 17 072263 297 18 072261 298 20 072301 289 22 072256 273 20 072258 280 12 072255 276 21 072257 289 16 072553 18 260 30 Apr 82 25 015 109 072555 283 33 072550 264 50 072558 279 36 072551 273 34 072554 276 46 072549 240 20 072552 269 36 072556 276 43 072557 281 53 072731 17 547 29 Apr 83 32 007 92 072732 549 34 072733 541 36 072734 547 37 072735 546 33 072736 549 46
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --
631911 18 TOttle Hot 424 07 Noy 79 46 0 13 81 631912 (fay release) 347 40 631931 19 I 386 07 Hoy 80 43 028 76 632058 395 31
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
631923 16 W(lshou1ol H1t 744 07 May 79 81 013 84 631924 (l1te ilpri -Eorly Hoy) 807 87 632039 18 I 996 08 fay 80 81 013 76 632040 987 68 632150 18 518 30 Apr 81 45 011 67 632202 520 46 632645 18 509 15-30 Apr 83 40 00B 96
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
631925 20 Woshou11ol Hot rlTamp 07 Jun 79 1-W 6T1-6h 55 631926 (late Moy-Early J1Jne Density 8-T9- 1-1middot9- ti 632037 18 135-16 lbgolin) 973 09 Jun 80 53 010- 91 632038 978 65 632151 20 S-29- 27 Noy 81 35 ampramp9i 109 632203 524 35 010-632513 21 102 25 llay 82 9 009 110 632514 99 9 632515 103 14 632516 99 6 632517 98 6 632713 19 100 27 Hay 83 7 009 122 632714 109 8
632715 103 8 632716 103 3 632717 106 12
-- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -- --- --- --- ---
631927 20 Washougal H1t 810 06 Jul 79 197 049 40 631934 (July releose) 821 191 631954 18
I 1067 07 Jul 80 126 025 53 631955 1070 118
100
Table 27--continued
a Only groups released downstream from Bonneville Dam were used due to variation in survival associated with changing spill to turbine discharge rate at dams only groups of the same stock released at similar size from the same site Assumed no variation in affect from Willamette Falls on survival or catch percentage Groups with rapid movement rates which were not dispursed and 50 past Jones Beach in 2 days or less were not used due to variable catch rates Nutrition treatment groups with no statistical difference (trend over the years) were combined into one observation per year
EI More complete information available from Dawley et al 1985b or releasing agency Table 21 Binary coded wire tags Ag=Agency code Dl=Data 1 code and D2=Data 2 code Color coded wire tags begin with WH and each two digits thereafter represent a color Brands are represented by the following Loc=Location on fish Sym=Brand symbol and Rot=Rotation of symbol For abbreviations symbol and descriptions see Dawley et al 1985b
_I Abbreviations are listed Bonn=Bonneville Cr=Creek D=Dam ds=downstream Fks=Forks Gal=Gallon Graded=Fish mechanically selected by size Hat=Hatchery lb=pound Lo=Lower Min=Minute S=South Tule=Lower river stock of fall chinook salmon Ungraded=No fish selection by size W=Water and =Released at
E_ Actual catch catch percent adjusted for effort
_ Seven-day average of river flow at Jones Beach during the week of median fishrecovery including Columbia River above Bonneville Dam Willamette River Cowlitz River and Lewis River 1 kcms = 1000 m3s
Inconsistent purse seine effort in 1977 consequently yearling fish not used for evaluation Catch adjustments were made for subyearling fish to equate with other years (8 11 8 and 15 increase respectively for Bonneville Dam Kalama Falls and Spring Creek fish released downstream from Bonneville Toutle and Washougal Hatchery fish) obtained from average purse seine contribution to those groups from 1978-1983
B Did not use 1980 due to effects of Mount St Helens
h Diseased fish at release not used in the analysis
i Higher density not used in the analysis
101
Table 28--Adult recovery data plus differences of juvenile catch related to river flow difference during downstream migration for mark groups used in evaluating effects of flow on beach and purse seine sampling efficiency biologically similar mark groups captred at Jones Beach during riverflows which were different by 3000 m second or more
----------------------- -------------------------
Group Group c1Jptured capt11red Mul t recov I Ad11lt recov
( low flow high flow Howl s Llcatch 7 M froo low fro11 high fog code fl tag code Low flow hi-low per 1 kc1s now group flow qro11p (AgD1D2) ( AgD1D2 gt (kc1s) hi (kc11s) increase (no) X (nogt 7
--------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------
Subyearling chinook salmon
09160S 071608 45 52 -123 101 006 350 036 09160S 072729 45 55 -8S 8 000 13 000 091605 072407 45 59 -137 S3 003 120 011 09160S 0721S6 45 34 -219 99 005 145 011 071842 072408 76 34 108 380 013 11 001 072329 072408 77 33 -28 61 C09 11 001 631942 631802 36 32 24 144 012 182 012 631942 632503 36 36 7 1631942 6320322462 36 37 -14631942 6321562255 36 42 06 54 004 200 007 631639 632036 29 80 -104 61 004 27 002 631639 632460 29 81 -96 1 000 0 000 631746 632036 45 64 -128 20 001 27 002 631746 632460 4S 65 -117 2 000 0 000 631957 632036 38 71 -12 9 7 000 27 002 631957 632460 38 72 -606 1 000 0 000 632105 632036 53 56 123 25 002 27 002 632105 632460 53 57 -116 1 000 0 000 631742 632254 79 33 23 16 001 53 003 631742 632463 79 43 72 1 000 1 000 632006 632463 91 31 -48 2 000 1 000 0S5001 0S5401 47 41 -151 35S 047 479 049 631641 632461 30 67 11 7 4 000 1 000 631641 632251 30 48 18 222 0 17 63 002 631803 632461 57 40 42 5 000 1 000 63193846 6322S1 48 30 -148 54 002 63 002 63193846 632461 48 49 -1 8 2 000 1 000 632153 632251 48 30 -88 170 005 63 002 632153 632461 48 49 14 4 5 000 1 000
Year ling chinook salu1on
071657 072701 73 66 -60071736 072701 49 90 OS071736 072140 49 44 217 S8 012 38 007 072140 072701 93 46 -101071661 072143 73 47 -15 98 130 20 004 071733 072143 49 7 1 21 27 006 20 004 071733 072S47 49 5 1 -166
102
)
Table 28--continued
63171112 6321342311 72 32 -271 1640 142 20 004 63181718 6321342311 64 40 -17 1 344 071 20 004 072249-51 0717252629 65 34 313 49 003 26 002 07225253 07173132 65 32 250 69 008 205 021 07225253 0725282930 65 35 oo072053 072518 sa 36 -243 0 000 0 000 072222 072518 62 32 -273 2 001 0 000 072048 072516 58 42 -222 J 001 0 000 072048 072718 58 62 -97072220 072516 62 38 -222 4 001 0 000 072220 072718 62 ss -25072051 072054 58 38 -19 1 0 000 2 001 072051 072522 58 33 -248
072217 072054 62 34 oo 2 001 2 ooi071741 072420 69 47 -163 2 001 2 001072040 072420 58 58 -119 9 003 2 001071742 072422 69 47 -188 25 008 2 001 072042 072420 58 58 -135 22 007 2 001 072305 072422 56 60 -117 11 004 2 001 072303 072419 62 34 -27 13 004 7 002 072046 072419 49 47 -71 20 007 7 002 072044 072513 58 35 -180 17 006 J 001 07194546 09162226 49 30 -175 77 013 276 062 07194748 091623-25 49 30 -48 54 009 493 122
Coho salmon
07190710 07242933 55 55 -s2 643 121 310 055 07190710 072747 55 67 -8507190710 07212831 55 69 -4 1 643 121 1771 328 07190912 07212932 40 36 -189 440 088 1451 256 071746 05113334 62 30 -136071746 05103940 62 48 -38 1053 152 766 057 050826 05103940 67 43 00 1524 120 766 057 072031-38 072549-58 76 33 55 2128 104 3719 138 072255-2301 072549-58 72 38 75 811 144 3719 138 63203738 632713-17 91 31 -32
y Binary tog of groups captured at the lowest river flow or at the highest river flow of the co1porison Ag=ogency code Dl=doto 1 code and D2=doto 2 code Separations by co1ao or hyphen indicate data ore averaged for 1ultiple tog groups Two or four digits following a co11a represent on additional tog nuaber with the soie agency and data l codes or the some agency code respectively Two or four digits following a hyphen represent o series of togs with the some agency code tnd data 1 code or agency code respectively
12 One thousand second= 1 kc1s = 35000 ft3second rJ Difference of river flow in thousand mlsecond during the week of median fish recovery
for groups in comparison ii [( catch hi flow - catch low flowgt+ catch low flow] x 100 +
(kc1s hi flow - kcas low flowgt Y Observed recoveries limited to age or youngest tag group returning in each coporison
11nd data which ore available for both sets of groups
103
Differences in sampling efficiency related to fish size were not apparent for groups captured exclusively in purse seine sampling Fork length distributions of marked fish from purse seine samples of some groups showed close agreement with length distributions obtained prior to release (see examples in Fig 35) we assume that survival for small and large fish within such groups was similar Substantial numbers of fish as small as 60 mm in fork length were captured in the purse seine thus we believe the purse seine was reasonably efficient at capturing smaller fish
Sampling efficiency was affected by fish size for those groups which were captured in the beach seine Catch rate of subyearling chinook salmon captured in the beach seine is inversely related to body size (Section I Fig 4) the same relationship may apply to yearling fish Location of fish in the cross section of the river n ot gear effici ency seems to have created the size related alteration of catch rate Catch rate comparison be tween mark groups of subyearlings that were not the same body size are therefore inappropriate Catch rate comparisons between marked groups of yearling fish released at different sizes were only made when the ratio of beach seine to purse seine catch was the same for both groups
Replicate Groups of Marked Fish--From 1977 to 1983 juvenile and adult recovery data (fisheries and escapement) for 120 sets of replicate groups were examined for consistency (Appendix Table Bl) We found the following (1) juvenile catch variations among replicates were random in relation to adult recoveries--j uvenile catch and adult recovery percentages varied in the same direction (positive or negative) among replicates 54 of the time (2) juvenile recoveries for 14 (12) of the 120 sets of replicates showed significant differences between replicates (P lt 010 from G statistic analysis)--by definition 10 of the sets of true replicates should fall outside the boundaries of no difference between groups ( 3) adult recoveries for 42 (35) of the 120 sets of replicates showed significant differences between replicate groups at P lt 010 and the direction of variation among groups within the sets was the same as observed for juvenile catches in 50 of the 42 se ts--as expected of replicate groups and ( 4) 82 of the replicates showing s ta tis tical difference as adults which is 15 of the total sets of replicates had differences greater than 20 between groups Some sets of replicate groups provided very consistent adult recovery data eg five sets of replicate groups of coho salmon released in 1981 at Sandy Hatchery (Westgate et al 1983b) produced from 363 to 535 adult recoveries per group with from O to 4 difference between replicates However other sets of replicates had large deviations from theoretical catch probabilities eg four sets of replicate groups of coho salmon released from Sandy Hatchery in 1980 (Westgate et al 1983b) produced from 152 to 377 adult recoveries per group with 8 to 34 difference between groups
It appears that juvenile catch data are normally distributed with expected variation however adult recoveries show greater than expected deviation which we assume represents survival differences Differences of survival to adulthood among replicate groups may have resulted from subtle differences of environmental conditions culture methods or migratory behavior that did not substantially affect survival during freshwater rearing
104
4
bull r1
Cl)
a
E
-
0
1978 YEARLING CHINOOK SALMON
20 Kooskia Hatchery (below Bonneville Jones Beach
3 May
10
30
20
10
0
30
20
10
Dami 26 April----shyx = 125 mm
x = 127 mm
(n= 131)
100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200
1981 COHO SALllON
Eagle Creek 15 April i = 149 mm (n = 609)
Jones Beach 18 May i = 154 mm
(n = 377)
110 120 130 140 1 50 160 170 180 190 200
1979 STEELHEAD
Chelan Hatchery Icicle Creek)26 April x = 227 mm (n = 200)
Jones Beach 26 May x = 225 mm
(n = 78)
omiddotLJSt__j___J__--1_-L_1_-----1sr===-170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290
Fork length (mm)
Figure 35--Fork lengths of marked fish groups before and after migration showing little change in length frequencies within the population
105
or migration Consequently treatment versus control evaluations made from adult recovery data may be affected and researchers comparing adult return data must consider the degree of error among repicates
Relative Survival in Relation to Controlled Treatments
Trea anent and control groups used to evaluate effects of fish size stock transportation rearing density nutrition and release date on adult survival were examined for inter- and intra-specific trends in relative survival to the estuary We assume from the assessment of variability in catches that significant differences be tween catch percentages of trea tinent and control groups generally indicate relative survival differences if recovery data are adjusted for sampling effort and river flow The conclusions reported herein are based on catches at Jones Beach only Individual researchers may draw different conclusions based on knowledge of other factors relating to their research
Estuarine catch data for treatment and control groups were compared with adult recovery data to determine if relative survival trends were similar and to identify the types of treatment groups from which juvenile catch rates may provide erroneous inferences of survival
Fish Size--Increased body size at release for hatchery reared salmonids has been equated with greater survival in downstream migration and to adulthood (Conte et al 1966 Salo 1955 Salo and Bayliff 1958 and Wallis 1968) Also minimum-size thresholds for survival have been hypothesized (Reimers and Loeffel 1967 Buchanan et al 1981 and Washington 1982) Fork length measurements of marked individuals from many groups captured at Jones Beach provided the opportunity to observe size-related survival differences during freshwater migration in the Columbia River
Estuarine catch data indicate a positive relationship be tween survival during migration to the estuary and increased body size at the time of release for chinook and coho salmon and steelhead The smaller individuals from particular release groups were missing from the migrant population captured at Jones Beach Examples of length frequency distributions for mark groups representing each species comparing sizes of fish prior to release to sizes after migration show loss of smaller fish from the population prior to arrival at Jones Beach (Fig 36) Not all groups of fish were measured prior to release Consequently we were unable to determine the extent of the loss of smaller individuals for the overall migratory population
Comparisons were made among mark groups captured between 1977 and 1983 which were similar in stock treatment and release characteristics but showed differences in size at release (Table 29) The majority of comparisons were for spring chinook salmon graded and marked for sizesurvival research from a multiyear study at various hatcheries in the Willamette River system (Smith 1979a and b Smith and Zakel 1980 and 1981 and Smith et al 1982 1983 and 1984)
The aggregate of groups showed a trend of higher catch percentages at Jones Beach for increased sizes (measured as nolb) at release (Table 29) 20
106
4 bull
29--Jones Beach catches and adult recoveries for marked fish from size at
Table release studies 1977-1983
Rele11se inforotion fo iJ Juvenile catch c Ad1Jlt recoveries d
CAf 117D2) Rele1Jse Release at Jone s Beach - observed-cu1ulative rand TreQtaent nurber date Size rm-w1nterispr1ng toto iotor-2-yr_J_yr 4 yr s yF
(Loe S11 Rot) So1Jrce b stock (tho1J)
054101 Dig Uhite Rear Pd morpholenemiddot 877 OS4201 control 914
631850 Cowlitz Hat 230 631816 245
(daorrgt ltnolb) (nogt (no) ()
SUBYEARLIN9HINOOK SALMON
18 Apr n 77 358 0555 82 333 0487
YEARLING CHINOOK SALMON
25 Apr 79 s 34 0194 7 36 0195
(nogt
202 166
719 706
--- --- --- --- --- -- -- --- -- --- -- __ --- -- --- - -- ---
631Bi17 Cowlitz H11t 243 23 Apr 79 s 631818 241 7--- --- --- --- --- --- -- --- -- -- --- --
050659RD IU 3 Kooskia Ha1t 050530RD IU 1 --- --- --- --- --- -- ---
07225253 Harian Fks Hat sizeamptiae 072254 -- --- --- --- - --- --- ---
072048 McKenzie H11 sizelti1e072051 072053 -- -- --- --- -- --- -- ---
072220 McKenzie Hat sizeamptille 072217 072222 -- --- -- --- - --- - ---
072719 0712521
McKenzie Ht1t sizeampti11e
0712721 -- -- -- -- -- --- - --
07718 072522
McKenzie H1t sizeamptirae
072720 -- -- -- --- - -- --- ---
071743 Oak ridge H1t sizeltiae 0711741 --- --- -- --- --- --- -- ---
071744 01kridge Hat sizeampti11e 071742 -- -- -- --- - -- --- --
072046 C11K ridge H11t sizeamptbie 072044 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --
072042 011kridge Hat sieamptiae 072040 -- --- --- --- --- --- -- ---
072303 072225
011lridge H11t sizeampti11e -- --- --- --- --- --- ---
072305 011kridge Ht1t sizeamptime 072307 -- -- --- --- - --- --- --
071615 Romd Butte Hat lg grade 071611 vibrio vac 071612 voc control
6317SS Toutle Hat631713 - -- -- --- - -- -631931 Toutle HGt 632058
051333 HogerD4n H4t A stock 051334 Salon River size
495 16 Apr 82 1 542 21
--- --- --- --- --- ---
819 16-24 Har 81 14 48l 20
-- --- -- --- --- ---
311 15 lfor 80 3 294 4 349 11
--- --- -- --- -- --
356 16 H1r 81 4 302 6 360 9
-- --- - --- --- -
320 08-18 Nov 83 7 323 08 Nov 83 11 Jl9 16
-- --- --- -- -- --
362 14 Ht1r 83 4 321 6 300 10
-- --- -- --- --- --
302 20 ff1r 79 12 320 14
--- --- -- --- ---
328 20 Ha r 79 6 295 8
-- -- -- -- ---
290 10 for 80 4 307 8
-- --- -- -- ---
307 10 ifor 80 9 309 16
-- --- -- --- ---
312 16 Mitr 31 bull 266 7
-- --- --- -- ---
299 16 Har 81 7 317 9
--- --- --- --- --
261 31 H1r 78 24 464 28 462 32
COHO SALOH
398 07 Jun 79 18 405 20
-- -- -- --- - -- --
386 07 Niy 80 18 395 20
STEEL HEAD
3B8 18-20 Apr 83 2 391 S
107
-
---
4 2 3--
--
35 34
--- --
24 17
20 7
--- --
18 1l 13
--- --
11 4
11 -- --
9 7 8
9 4
14 -- --
32 40
36 50
-- --
15 lC liJ
20 18
--- --
12 9
--- ---
14 17
--- ---
31 33 34
107 103
43 31
84 104
0200 829 0191 632
--- --- --
0055 0 0031 0
--- ---
0046 59 0025 14
--- --- --
0153 48 0112 21 0079 6
--- ---
0078 69 0029 12 0075 71
--- --
oosa0046 0072
-- --
0057 0023 0095
--- --
0173 292 0178 229
--- ---
0299 223 0282 313
-- --
0145 246 0202 272
--- ---
0148 339 0134 228
--- --
0096 139 0063 91
--- ---
0104 145 0133 106
--- --
0183 0 0122 0 0121 1
0310 955
0237 7fl -- --
0219 204 0165 133
0281 0363
() m m m
002 017 023 002 011 018
074 250 313 058 244 2t88
--- --- --- ---
085 275 344 057 218 260
-- -- ---
000 000
--- --- ---
002 OOi001 003
--- -- ---
003 012 015001 005 007 ooo 001 002
-- --- --
003 019 001 004 003 020
--- - --
-- -- --
-- --- ---
007 073 097 001 040 072
--- -- --- --
006 056 068 ooa 074 106
- -- --- --
007 067 085 006 054 089
--- -- --- ---
007 067 110 ooJ 036 074
-- -- ---
004 045 002 034
-- --- ---
004 048 -
002 033 --- -- ---
000 ooo ooo ooo 000 oooooo ooo ooo
000 240
000 t97 -- --- -- ---
000 OSJ 000 034
Table 29--continued
a More complete information available from Dawley et al 1985b or releasing agency Table 21 Binary coded wire tags Ag=Agency Dl=Data 1 code and D2=Data 2 code Color coded wire tags begin with WH and each two digits thereafter represent a color Brands are represented by the following Loc=Location on fish Sym=Brand symbol and Rot=Rotation of symbol For abbreviations symbol and descriptions see Dawley et al 1985b
b More complete information available from Dawley et al 1985b or releasing agency Figure 21 Abbreviations used are listed Fks=Forks Hat=Hatchery Lit=Little Pd=Pond Rear=Rearing Sal=SalmoA Wh=White and =Released at
S Actual number recovered and effort adjusted catch--effort not consistent during fall and winter periods thus total recovery percentages are not comparable between different studies
I Observed recoveries may provide erroneous comparisons between studies not migrating at the same time or between stocks because of possible difference associated with unequal fishing effort and sampling effort
108
0 c
i-
0
C) 0
SUBY EARLING CHINOOK SALMON40 1979
30
20
10
SPRING CHINOOK SALMON
1979
Caron Hatchery (Wind River + below Bonneville Dami 2May i= 129mm (n = 200I
Jones Beach 13 May x = 134 mm
(n = 76l
100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 Fork length fmml
0
30
20
10
0
30
20
10
COHO SALMON 1978
Tunle Rock Pd 3May x 151 mm ln = 240)
Jones Beach 29 May
x= 164mm (n = 641
110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200
STEELHEAD
1979
Tucannon Hatchery (below Bonneville Dami 15 May i = 164 mm (n = 2001
Jones Beach 19 May
x 177mm
ln = 461
120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240
Fork length (mm)
Figure 36--Fork lengths of subyearling chinook yearling chinook and coho salmon and steelhead before and after migration showing an upward shift in size of the population at Jones Beach
WILLAMETTE SUMMER STEELHEAO25
20
a 15E
0
10l
5
Hatchery April 29 1978 -
n = 1100 x= 187 mm
Williamette Falls May 12 1978 n = 663 x = 200 mm
Jones Beach May 19 1978
_-- n = 140 ii= 210 mm
Fork length Imm)290
Figure 37--Fork leneth measurements of Skama nia summer s teelhend smoltR prior to ha tchery release from ca tches at Willamette Falls and from catches at Jones Beach 1978 Hatchery anil Willamette Falls l ength frequencies from Buchanan et a l (1979)
20
0
E 15 ro V
10 C a
5
SNAKE RIVER ORIGIN STEELHEAD 1981
Dworshak Hatchery26 April x = 185 mm (n = 148) ----
Jonrs Beach14 May x 188 mm
(n = 78)
110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250
Fork length (mm)
Figure 38--Fork lengths of Snake River steelhead hefore And after miPrRtion showing little change in length frequencies for the portion of the population less than 180 mm
110
of 28 comparisons showed a positive relations hip A two-way ANOVA was calculated to compare the catch percentages according to size at release (similar groups were paired according to difference in size at release) The ANOVA was conditioned on the marked groups and the F-value for size atrelease was used to determine significance The ANOVA table is
Source of Probability variation DF ss MS F of F-value
Size at release 1 0002929 0002929 3972 00565
Mark group 27 0573188 0021229 28791 00000
Remainder 27 0019908 000073735
The probability value of 00565 for size at release indicates significance at the a = 0 06 level The only comparison available for effects of size on steel head groups from the Snake River showed reversed recov ery rate and was not included in the statistical analysis
Adult recoveries (Table 29) showed greater survival for groups released at a larger size in 13 of 19 comparisons and were statistically greater in 11 comparisons
Minimum-size thresholds for successful migration to the ocean have been suggested by several investigators Buchanan (1981) hypothesized a minimum-size threshold of 180 mm for steelhead of Willamette River origin Our observations of Willamette River steelhead support Buchanans hypothesis (Fig 37) Observations of s teelhead from the Snake River however do not show this relationship individuals as small as 110 mm migrated successfully from the Snake River to Jones Beach eg Dworshak steelhead ranging from 100 mm to 240 mm (Fig 38) Washington (1982) hypothesized a minimum-size threshold for survival of 130-140 mm for coho salmon from Columbia River Hatcheries--developed from fork length measurements of migrants at Jones Beach Reimers (1967) hypothesized that the minimum-size threshold for wild subyearling chinook salmon in the Columbia River varies between tributaries
Transportation Past Dams--Relative survival differences for marked fish groups transported by truck or barge past dams in the Columbia River system (1977-1983) were calculated from catch percentages at Jones Beach Comparisons between catch percentages of transported and control fish were limited to two data sets (1) juveniles transported directly from hatcheries upstream or downstream were compared to controls released at the hatchery and (2) juveniles captured at McNary Dam subsequently marked and transported downstream past three dams were compared to controls released in the tailrace of McNary Dam
111
A large range of catch percentages was observed for transported groups which moved rapidly past Jones Beach (50 of the catch in 2 days or less) and marked groups behaving in this fashion were not used in the assessment of effects from transportation We hypothesize that these particular transported fish migrated rapidly from release sites to Jones Beach and did not disperse widely in the river Low catch percentages unrepresentative of abundance resulted when the majority of individuals within such a group passed during nonfishing hours and high catch percentages also unrepresentative of abundance resulted when the majority passed during fishing hours In either instance the comparison to control groups was erroneous
Calculated survival estimates generally increased with the number of dams bypassed (Fig 39) the average increased survival estimate for one dam bypassed was 44 (12 transport groups) and for eight dams 236 (9 transport groups) Data (Table 30) were transformed to stabilize the variance of the dependent variable for linear regression The hypothesis that the slope = 0 was rejected at Plt001 (t = 272 49 df) Average survival increase from bypassing dams was SO 33 20 and 11 per dam respectively for subyearling chinook salmon yearling chinook salmon coho salmon and steelhead
Adult recoveries for transport versus control groups were evaluated to determine if survival changes from transportation were similar to those observed from estuarine recovery estimates (Table 30) A positive correlation exists between change in adult survival and numbers of dams bypassed as juveniles (average no increase for one dam and 121 increase for eight dams) (Fig 39) however the slope of the linear regression (transformed data) was not significantly different from zero (t = 04 35 df) Comparison of adult survival increases to estuarine estimates of juvenile survival increases provided the following correlation coefficients (r) 042 014 072 and 077 for subyearling chinook salmon yearling chinook salmon coho salmon and steelhead respectively In general adult recoveries showed the same survival benefits from transportation as estuarine sampling but as observed from evaluation of replicate groups the variation was greater within adult data Not all adult recoveries of mark groups are avaliable at this time thus these conclusions regarding adult recoveries are preliminary
Estuarine catch data for some species and or stocks may provide a more accurate estimation of effects of transportation of juveniles past dams than adult data
Serial Releases --Delayed releases of coho salmon (June and July) from Cascade Toutle and Washougal Hatcheries generally showed increased juvenile catch percentages that often were significantly greater than catch percentages of groups released at the normal release time in early May (Table 31) Adult recoveries showed increased returns from late May and June releases as expected on the basis of juvenile recoveries but July releases displayed an erratic pattern (Westgate et al 1981 1982 and 1983a Schneider and Foster 1981)
In July high water temperatures in the river and the ocean may have affected the survival of coho salmon groups during transition to seawater
112
Table 30--Survival differences between fish groups transported past dams and
those not transported from catch percentages at Jones
1977-1983
RaEASE INFORMTIOH Toa Q
(AV 1702)
r11nds floe Syt RolltesoorceHre1llentl b
Hutter thou I
091612 UpstreQ1 Willa1 F1JlsAu1sville Pd 44 6
0916ll lconlroll 0916111 ds Willa1 foils ltrsI 091606
091607 -- --- -- --- -- ---
072407 Bonn11vi tle Hat lcontroll 072663 Uaitilla Ramponneville Hot
Cupstrea1 tr-0ns) --- - --- -- -- --
072827 llonn Hat (Controll 0712826 Verni to Br Cupstrea1 transtule)
--- --- -- --- --- ---050426 RASUl Kooskfa Hat (control 050427
050421 050420
050527 OS0528
1012210 102211
ds Bonn Dai ttransl -- --- - --- -- -
Asolin8
WMHageran H Ccontroll DS onn Dai (trans)
--- --- -- --- -- -- ---
Asotin 1111Hageraan H (controlgt ds 8onn Da (rans)
-- ------- - -- --
satin WAHaqer11an H Icon troll ds onn Dai Ctrons l
--- --- --- --- --- ---
WHPUGHBLLAIFl llcary Pabull C resevoir control) WHYIIXYIJN I
All Reservoir Control iiIIHOR6litGRAIC1 ds Bonn Dai (truck trans)
431 464 920 435
1058 1023
1003 1002 557 463 440 510
-- --
581 560
-- --
SS4 557
-- ---
15l 230 381 170
--ornmw JOES BEACH RECOVERY IHFORMTIOH IHFQBMlQ
lledfon Flow Fish fish Jones Adj Deas
Date catch recov Be1ch c cald Observed el passed (da119bI (nolte lkm1 mmiddot lnoI Clgt lnol
SUBYEARLIHG CHINOOK SALMH 04 Apr n04 Apr 77
-- -- --
23 Apr 82 14-20 r 82-- - --
16 Jun 8J 02 Jun 83 -- --- --
29 Kay 7903-20 Kay 79-- -- --
21 Hay 79 20 lay 79-- -
OJ lay 80 --
06 Jbullln 80 --- --
26 Kay 81 28 Hay 81 --- --
29 Jun-I 4Jul 78 17Jul-OSep 78 29Jiin-OSe 7828Jun-13JrJ 78
209 504
--
262 137 --
111 47 --
31 38 -
3 74
6 34 21 67 -
3 0 l 7
Ulfoy 45 middotmiddot
14May 45
-----
OINay 100 10Qy 102 -- --- --
IOHqy 16Jul ---
17Jun 231ay -
OJJul 31Kay --
24Jun lSJun -
104 75
-- --
55 84
--- --
42 76
- --
91 91
-- --
l8Jun 11207Jun 124 -- -- --
21Jul 57
21Jul 57 16Jul 68
OU4
0557
0254 0137
0168 0078 0058 0102 -- --
0012 0177 0023 0084 0066 0132 0108 0000 0042 0156
35
59
5 s
18 192
-- --
279 43
-- -
196 201
-- --
54
004 OOJ
-3
-4 001 001 8 004 038 8 ---
04 8 G08 8 --
035 036 8 ---
014 1HLGRAICJ All Truck TMnsport V
34 19iJl-JOftug 78 204 28Jun-30ft11g 78
7 1bull1114 1 6Ju 39 0627 3 57 om 298 U6 3
-- -- --- -- -- -- - -- ----- --
WHYUBLULAIJPl3 Ncffory Dail reservoir control) 198 05lul-mup 79 4llliRDYWfK llcffary Da1Ctallroce controI 547 12Jun-7Ju 79 16 IIHRDPKORLAltl 3 JI11HLBrwLB
tLAIH2 404 2 4JbullJl-06Au1 79 2
BtACKLAI 03 11 Ap r-03Ju 79 2 IIHROLlltfKLAIH4 19 9 08-24 A1Jg 79 0 IIHROLGYW LA52 3 06 l 4111y-21Jiin 79 0 All Ta1lrace and Reservoir Control ii 1357 11Apr-24Aug 79 24 11HRDLGFKRA32 2 ds Bonn Dai Ctruci-trans I 34 l4Hay-21Jun 79 7 WHROPKLBRM+I 435 12-29 Jun 79 141 IJHLBYWLGRftl+2 412 24Jul-06Aug 79 29 WHRDLBYWRMH 18S 08-24 j111 79 20 IIHRIFKORRAl+3 22S 02-17 Ju 79 24 WHRA31 07 16Apr-02)Jl 79 0 All Truck Transport Groups 1329 16 Ap r-24ftug 79 221 --- -- --- --- --- --- --- -- ---CE LAIFI CEOY LAIFl
HcHory Dai Cta1lrace controll All Tail race Control ii 00RAICJ ds Bonn Daa truck-trans)LA RACl 111 Truck Transport Group _il
-- --- -
--- ---390 456 846 407 39S802
OJ17132Ullil-4 ltcHary Doa(tdlrace control) 426 031733 ds Bonn Du lttrucK trlt111sl 429 --- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - --
-- ----
09Jun-14Jbullil 80 16-31 Jul 80
09Jun-31Jil 80 l8JiJlmiddotOlAu1 8013Jun-l7Ji1 8013Jun-01Aug BO -- -- --
09-29 Jul 8109-31 Jul 81-- -- -
4 2 6
34 40 74
10 44
---
lOAif15Ju 03AIJ1OlJbulli
23Jul 22Jun 26Jun 04A11q lSliuf18Ju 15Jul --- --
25Jul 04AIJl29Ju 21Jul lOJUI 15Jul -- --
OSAul24Ju middot-- --
113
--
37 0 IOI 40 0077
36 0013 48 o948
0000 0000
38 0052 70 0245 69 0424 45 om39 0279 57 0234
0000 68 OJOI --
42 0035 40 0020 42 0027 48 0268 53 0274 sJ 0271 --
58 0087 62 0272 --
-- - --
83 006 3 3
3 3
548 041 3 --- -- ---
111 013 3 3
331 041 3 ------
15 004 66 015 J
-- -- ---
Beach
Estim sur Flowe chQnge of Bonn trans2ort r Dai ii tuv 1d11i (kens) 1 11
o4 E 28 -23
--- -- --
78 -47
------
72 -42-- -- --
56 33 20 -- - ---
so 949 850 -- ---
82 265 -84 ------
111 80 l --- -
57 355 942 -- - --
37 331 583 -- -- -
57 810 m---- ---
57 202 27S --- --
Table 30--continued
LAHl2(231609) Hcffory Do1(toilrace control) LAIF1 3lt231609gt LAIC1 3(231611) LAINl 3(231611) LAIF2 4 ( 231611) LAIC24(23W13) LAUt24231611 l All Ttii race Control GrouDs i RAV1lt231610) ds Bonn bi- lttriick trons gt RA12(231612) RAV3lt231614) All Truch Tr11nsport Groups i ---- --- ---
lA2Ll3ampLS2L HcNuy amp1 ltwilme control (231627)
LA2T1 3llS2T (231630)
LA2X1 3(231633) All Tllilr11ce Control i RAIJ1lt23162S) ds Biinn Doa truck trans) RAIJ3C2l1628) bull RAIJ2(231631) All Tr1Jck Transport Groiips i RA3H231626) ds Bonn Ooi (barge transgt Rl33(231629) RA32(231632gt All Barge Tronsport Groups i -- --- -- --- - --- --
054901ROUl Spring Cr Hcit (control) OSS001RDU4 ds Bonn Dai (trans) 056201 OSS401 050741 050749 050742 050743 050746
051051 0 51057 050851
Spring Cr Hot (control) ds Bonn D01 lttr11ns) Spring Cr Hot (controlgt
Rock Cr 1upstreo11 tr1ns)
Spring Cr Hot(contngtlgt Uaiti Jla middot Cupstrea1 trans)
S6 30 35 83 70 78
334 86 54
188 1 5S 397 150 U7
106 693 151 140 62
353 150 152 86
3B8 758 760 923 981
24-26 JbullJn 82 129J1Jn-OlJ1Jl 82 G 06-13 JbullJl 82 215-17 Jul 82 120-22 JiJl 82 127-29 Jul 82 203-05 ljg 82 0 29Jun-OSiug 82 7
25Jun-02JIJ1 82 7 12-21 JtJl 82 8
26Jul-06i1Jg 82 8 25Jun-06Aug 82 23 middot -- - --
08-1S JbullJl 83 10 20-27 Jul 83 0
29Jul-OSAug 83 0 16JbullJn-02Sep 83 10 07-14 JbullJl 83 319-25 JtJ 83 S
30Jul-02Aua 83 807JIJ1middot02Auq 33 16 10-1S JbullJl 83 718-26 J1J 83 3
28Jul-01Aug 83 311-ug_ 13
08 Apr 77 215 08 Apr 77 304
26Jul
26Jul 26Jul 02Aug 09iug -
31Jbullil OlJbullJl 19Jul 06ibullJg 24JtJ( 22JbullJl
22Jul 20Jul 21Jbulld OlAug 26Jul 13Jul 24Jul 04Aug 19Jul
60
66 66 54 63 -
54 122 73 63 66 75
75 75 75 62 66 65 66 61 75
291pr 39 JOApr 47
18 Apr 78 175 02Hay 88 20 Apr 78 201 30lpr 88
0071 0000 022s 0048 0057 0103 0000 00720185 0176 0181 0179 0153 0000 0000 0057 0038 0066 o2se0088 G0730039 0116 0069 0404 0560 0232 0247
767 151pr-OSNiy 81 228 2Slt1y 79 0126 309 634 2 57 21 pr Bl 66 28Hay 109 0045
150S 21 Apr 81
388 15 Apr 82 84 251pr 94 0247 1023 08-13 Apr 82 153 06ltay 100 0103 467
071708 Oi1710 071709
UpstreH Willoai FallsStayton Pd 509 31Kw01Jun 78 96 12Jun ( con troll 51 2
83 83
o1s4o157
omsm
072741 WHLBGHLAAN4 IIHLBGHLMHl WHLBWHtBRAYl VHLBBLRm WHLBYIIYII Rm lllLBYWXY RAT2 6317125 RllAN1 LDM4 091621 091622 091626 091623 091624 091625
ds Uilla1 Falls (trans) 512 3ll11iy-Ollun 78 100 llJWI
Bonn Hat (controltote fd U Uaatilla R (1Jpstrea1 trans) --- -- -- --- -- --
Corson H11t (controlgt Pasco (1Jpstre11 tlQns) ds Bonn qi1 (trans)
Entilt Hot (control)
Uernit11 Bridge(trans) S Sonti1111 H (controlgt
I
ds Uilla11 Falls (trans)
1ijfijING CHINOOK SLIIOH 499 23 Mcir 83 13 OSpr 121
___ 99-2r-pr _ _ oy _10-
410 03 11ay 79 28 13Hay 97 391 23 Apr 79 33 14Kay 81 383 21pr-07Noy 79 126 09Koy 97 363 404 398 878 2S-26 Apr 78 43 2011ay 92 358 166 02 Hay 78 13 23Kay 87
0052 0019 0090 0107 0102
0049 0102
250 13 Hllr 78 295
26 08Apr 19 0084 149 269 13 Hor 78 246 134
67 07Apr 79 0237
114
2 001 J 3 3
5 001 3 bull 69
3 3 3 3 67 3 3 J 3
334 044 355 047 31
--- -- ---
soo 054 479 049 67 126 007
360 020 -2
S 001 18 001 -2
102 010 63 012
-33 001 1 000 -4 J 000 1
4 451 us
65
9 1
OJ hi
ss
62 16
74
123 143
21
29 6
6 -9
-73 -64
-60 -6
2 23
-58
35 gt -6513 -91
117
786 121 04 182 86
Table 30--continued
071926 072927 071928 071929 071930
s S11ntia1 H (controlgtI
ds Ui1111 Falls UrQlls) -- -
-- -- -- --
071919 s SQnhQI HOQkridge H (control) 071920 071921 071922 071923 071924
071945 071946 071948 071947
ds Uilla1 Falls (trcnsgt
-- -
-- - -
s SQntia1 H (control)
ds llillobull FGlls (transgt--- --- -- --- --
-
100330LNgtP2 Kooskia Hot (control) WHRDXYRAL4 ds Bonn OG1 ltrcns) IJHRDLBfltAll IIHRDYII RAL3 IJHRDFt nL=
050532 OS0529
631702 631703 631704
631809 631810 631808
bull
bull
KooskiG Hat (control) ds Bonn DG1 (trins) --- -- --- - --
Leivenvorth Hat (controlgt Leovenvorth Hot (hauled 4 h) ds Priest Rap (tlilnsgt -- -- -- -- --
Leavenworth Hot (controlgt Le11venvorth Hot (hc1uled 4 h) ds Priest RQp (trans) --- - -- -- -- --
034602LfiPit Leovenwrth Hot (controlgt 034702LAfgtl2
035102LfiPl4 03480LAPll White Bluffs (trQnsgt 034902LfiPPl
03S002Ll 034302 Rfl91 Dolton Point CtrQns) 034402Rt92
034S02Rn93 bull
03S202MIKl 035302 R1K2 035402 RAIK3 - - -- -- -
RDF1 Posteros Ferryle1venworth H LDFl (upstteQ1 controlgt RDIY3 LDIY3 RDIL2 LDIL2 RDF2 ds Priest
1
Ropids o (trans) LDF2 RDIL3 LDIL3 RDIY2 LDIY2
RDFJ Richland II (trans) LDF3
RDIY1 LDIYl RDill LDILl
-- --- -
071609 Rnd Butte Hat (control) 071610 ds Bonn Doi ltrons)
-- --- -- -- -- --
315 327 311 326 328
316 328 324 342 345 35l
294 299 28S 321
838 371 370 354 369
-- ---
613 623
952 943 946
-- -
975 1003 948
328 329 331 320 326 354 324 327 324 329 328 326
--- -
153 164 134 153 139 150 15S 162 148 152 132 153
158 163 139 154 137 159
66S71S
07 Nov 78
07 Nov 78 - -- --
21 Kar 78
23 llar 78
-- - --
14 KGt 80
l4 ltGr 80 -- -- --
12 Apr 78 26-28 Apr 78
-- -- --
16 Apr 80 14 Apr 80 -- -- --
25 Apr 78
08 toy 78 -- --
26 Apr 79
15 tloy 79 -- ---
--
--
24Apr-01Hoy 80
24Apr-Olltoy 80
8
18
94
151
42
66
61 79
14 26
67 47 80
104 86
164 --
30
41
24flpr-01KQy 80 141
-- -- --
05-13 Hoy SO
22-27 Hay 80
- - --
22-29 Hoy 80
-- -- --
22 Hay 78 30 Hoy 78
23
48
40
-
91 110
- -- -- -
115
071tar 57
1Sflpr -- -
13Apr
13flpr
-- --
OSApr
30ltQr -- ---
111toy OSHoy
0411Qy 05Noy
11
--
77
77
--
49
49 --
a1aa
83 93
-- -- --
221toy 2JKoy 24Hoy -- --
291toy 281tay 30IQy -- --
26Kcly
18ttiy
OSttoy
87 87 87 --
76 76 16 --
s1
76
83
-- -- --
07J1Jn
OSJun
--
OSJun
--
90
90
--- --
90
-- -
11Jun 83 03Jun -- --
75 --
0009
0018
0168
0265
0184
0271
0073 0064
--
--
0044 0072
0090 0010 0115
0142 0115 0209
0032
0085
0115
0041
0090
0074
0218 0215
170 018
182 028 --- -- ---
127 G13
--
---
-
60 006
- ---
84 014
63 oio
-- ---
26 003 8 ooo
9 001 3 ooo
90 009 8 001 7 001 -- --
55 006 5 000 2 ooo
4 000
6 001
2 ooo
1 000 5 001
HA
04 JI
- -
09 I]
8 67
8 73
3 J8- ---
3 2Sl- --
3 33
7 68
- -- -
5 J8f
5 38 y
2 67
66 --
58
-
47 --
-18
--
63 -
28 --
47 -
177
253
---
120
---
80
--
s -
56 - -
-54
- --
-24
-- -
-82
-- --
middot67- ---
-92 - -
-96- --
48
-75
- ---
- ---
- --
365 - -
Table 30--continued
071826 071825 0718127
631812 631811 631820
Rnd tte Hat (control) I
ds Bonn amp1 (trans) - -- --- --- --
Winthrop H ltcontrol) Kethow R (hauled 4 h) ds Priest R D111 (transgt
WH011LGORllPP2 Posco VMC4rson Hat(controU WHORORXY RAU VHORBLORRM2 --
UHROLB WHORLBYli IIHORYllOR WHORYWGH 050359 050358 OS0654 OS0660 OS06i50 OS06Z
ds Bonn Doi (trans) I
--- ----
lillord Hat (control I
ds Bonn Doa (transgt -- --
-- -- -
llillord Hot (controlgt
ds Bonn D01 (tNns gt
488 so1 496
----
673 862 776
4-40 297 289
--
199 198 197 198 424 430 St4 337 479 S14
IIHLBYULAtHl Icicle CrChellln HQt(controlgt 241 VHLBPK LMH2 WHLltLGLMH3 VHUORRAY3 WHLBRDRIY2 VHLBWHAAYI
OS04SS 102162 102161 102119LD41 -- -- --
230606 lllKJ 230607 RALl 230608RAl4 2l16QSRAL2 - - -
231604 LAK2 231603RIIPPl 231601Ml1 ---
632838LltSl 63nS39RAS1 6328 40Rl52 --- -- -
ds Bonn Daa (trans )
--- ----
Dworshllk lfilt (controlgt 8lb I 6lb
9lb ds Bonn Daa (transgt 6lb -- - -- -- -
Dvorshak Jfot (control) Ska11n1 Light lttr1111s)
--- ----
Dworsnak H-lt (controlgt SlGn1 Light (transgt
--- ----
Lyons Ferry (controlgt
--
-
-
lilGllowa Ht (upstr1M1 trcns) --- -- -
242 192 228 243 233 S91 469 492 400
--
298 322 330 329
310 29S 319
S46 330 320
176
23-31 llay 79 240 OSJ1Jn 62
30 Nay 79 149 02Jun 76 -- -- -- -- - --
20 Apr 79 16 30tloy 76 24 Apr 79 34 27Noy 84 16 toy 79 73 01Jun 76
COHO SALIIOH
03 Noy 78 01-04 Kiiy 78 -- -- --
24Hoy-08Jun i8
08 tJJl 78 -- --- ---
14middot23 Kay 80
24-25 liqy 80
47 23
13
21
21
29
1911ay 92 1Sllay 92
---
11JiJn
14Jun -- -
30l1ay
JlHar
83
83 --
90
90
STEEUEll
26 Apr 79
28 Apr 79
-- - --
17-25 Apr 80
2911oy-02Hoy 80 -- ---
19 Aer 82 22pr-vlltoy 82
-- - --
30 Aor 82
55
80
124
9S
13 37
21 22Noy-u3Jun 82 195 -- --
01-20 Har 83 09-13 Kiy 83 - --
OS Hay i8 --
68 96 78
11
24Kay 84
OBllay 97
---
07Koy
05Nay -- -
88
88 --
12Jtay 102 2SApr 94
-- --
20H11r 29Kay -
29K11r 2811ay
109 uo
- --
122 122
-- -- --
92 WHORORRDRM3 Riniold HIJt (control) 181foy IIHORLGYWRAL2 Het ow RWells channel 199 271tpr-0811dy 78 17 26Hoy 87 IHORORXY LAPPI 203 --
(upstreo1 tr1ns gt - --- ----
VHLBPKlGLMJJ Kethow RVells chonnel WHl8PKYllRIIJ1 (control) IIHLSLBRm ds Bonn Doa(trGns gt - -- - -- - -- --
183 201 97
WHBlOR ds Priest Rapids 04111llells channel (downstreobull control I
IIHBlllH
RA 52 1
RA 17 l
Ketl1ow Rllells chanriel (qpstreH trcins) - --- - -- -- -- ---
ds Priest Rapids DUells chcnnel (downstreo1 control)
Kethow R (upstreaa transgt
-- --
224
200
---
09-14 Hoy 79
12 Hoy 79-- -- --
20-24 Apr 82
19-23 npr 82--
19-27 Apr 83
19-27 Apr 83
13
12
2S
23
49
23
---
28Noy 76
15ttoy 81 - -- --
OBllay
201tay -- --
12Jtoy
1Sltay
102
109 --
104
2
116
0282
0338
0033 0055 0111
0139 0053
0053 0084
0033
0039
0106
0139
0144
0510
0039 0067
0064 0319
Otl41 0305
0079 0058
0042
0ISS
0108
0096
0224
012
0
0
16 7 7
89 53
-- -
63
oO
000
000
002 001 001
020 009 -
021
020 --- --
618
518
356
543
-- -
568
453
I 207
045
039
053
on
--
037
113
069 051
-- --
so 013
60 062
2
5
4
8
8
8
-2
-s
9
-s
-5
68 6 ---
25 236 -40
74 -62 -55
- --
amp7 58 -s-- --
12
72 18 middot14
76 17 45
- - --
s9 269 --
87 83
--
92 399 --
29 116
- -- -
40f -23 --
69 253 --
40J -16 --- ---
50 -40
205 --
--
--
--
middot26- --
377 --
--- -
bull bull bullbull
bull
Table 30--continued
a
E_
E_
il
h
il
More complete information available from Dawley et al 1985b or releasing agency Table 21 Binary coded wire tags Ag=Agency Dl=Data 1 code and D2=Data 2 code Color coded wire tags begin with WH and each two digits thereafer represent a color Brands are represented by the following Loc=Location on fish Sym=Brand symbol and Rot=Rotation of symbol For abbreviations symbol and descriptions see Dawley et al 1985b
Transport groups with time period from first to median fish capture at Jones Beach in 2 days or less were not included in analysis Abbreviations Bonn=Bonneville Br=Bridge D=Dam ds=downstream Hat=Hatchery N=North NA=Nonapplicable R=River S=South Trans=Transported and Willam=Willamette
Combined weekly average flow volume of Columbia River at Bonneville Dam Willamette Lewis and Cowlitz
3Rivers during week of median fish recovery
at Jones Beach kcms = 1000 m second
Beach plus purse seine data adjusted for effort and flow at Jones3
Beach (catch of recovery at lowest flow increased by 85 per 1000 m second difference) Comparisons not made for actual catch less than 10 transport fish Mark groups were combined where possible to exceed the minimum
Preliminary observed data dashes represent no data available
Weekly average flow volume of Columbia River at Bonneville Dam during week of mean date between release and median fish recovery at Jones Beach--represents best flow during passage through dams
[(Percent recovery transport group+ percent recovery control)] x 100
Weekly average flow volume of Columbia River at Bonneville Dam during week of mean date between release and median fish recovery at Jones Beach
Combined data comparison
j_ WHRDPKOR also used for test group (Brand = RA I+ 3) Tag not included in adult recovery information
k Weekly average flow volume of Columbia River at Priest Rapids Dam during the week following release
1 Weekly average flow volume of Snake River at Ice Harbor Dam during the week following release
117
$ gt
Table 31--Jones Beach catches and adult recoveries for serial releases of coho salmon lt middot
1977-1983 ------------------------------------------------- -----------------------------middot----------------------------
Release information -RovetY _inforation at Jones_Beach
Toi o (Ag 17D2gt S99rsJl
072606 Bonneville Ho1t 072607 --- --- --- --- --- --
071 90811 Cosco1de Hot 07190710 07190912 --- --- -- --- --- -- ---
071963 Cascade Hilt (for reference)
-- --- --- --- --- ---
07212730 C11scade H1t 07212831 07 2129 32 -- --- --- --- --
0712429 33 Cosc1de H1t ( for reference)
--- --- --- -- --- -- ---
072747 C1sude Hot (for reference)
-- - --- --- --- ---
631911 12 Toulle Hat 6317i581913 63192829 -- --- --- --- --- --- ---
6319312058 Toi1tle Ho1t ( for reference)
-- --- --- --- --- --- ---
63192324 U1sho11g1l Hat 631925 h 631926 63192734
--- --- --- --- -- --- ---
632039 40 l1shoug1l H1t 632037 38 i 63195455 ---- --- --- --- --- --- ---
6321502202 lllshougal H1t 6321512203 -- -- --- --- --- --- ---
632513-17 lfosho1101l Hit lt for reference I
--- --- --- --- --- --- ---
632645 Washougal H1t 632713-17
Juvenile catch effort
N11mber Dale Size c Odj I d (thoi1_ (d111Royrl (n9_f_ELJn9) or
269 02Hoy83 15 22 0081 273 31May83 16 28 0112
--- --- -- --- -- --- --- ---
548 07Hay79 23 36 0082 531 07JtJn79 23 69 0147 498 06Jul79 23 1 06 0444
--- --- -- --- -- --- --- ---
292 28Apr80 24 13 0082 --- -- -- -- -- -- --- --
516 06Ht1y8l 17 52 0109 540 08 J1JnBl 17 46 0102 566 06Jul81 17 32 0131
--- --- --- -- -- --- - --
559 25Hay82 18 55 0106
--- --- --- --- --- -- --- ---
43 1 24Moy83 17 21 0059 --- -- --- --- -- --- -- --
77 1 07Hly79 18 86 013S 803 07 Jun79 19 210 0296 809 06J11179 18 205 0525
--- --- -- -- -- --- --- --
781 07Hoy80 19 74 0192 -- -- --- --- -- --- --- ---
1551 07Nly79 17 168 0139 730 07Jun79 20 120 o 187829 07Jim79 20 119 0 162
163 1 07Jul79 20 388 0503 --- --- --- --- --- -- -- ---
1983 08N1y80 18 150 0135 195 1 09 Jun80 18 118 0104 2137 07 JiJl80 19 244 0262 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
1038 30Aor81 18 91 0 110 1053 27Hoy81 20 70 0089 --- --- --- -- -- -- --- ---
501 25H1182 21 91 0182 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
509 521
15-30Ap r8327tiily83
18 40 0081 19 38 0086
Dote of Flow Flow adj 111edian Jones catch fish Beach e 7 kCl)S
recoverr (kcasr m ft
14 Hoy 92 0096 3 Jun 122 0162 --- --- --- --- ---
18 Hoy 81 0090 14 Jun 55 0128 13 Jul 40 0331 --- --- --- ---
17 Hoy 76 0086 --- -- --- --- --- ---
17 Kiy 67 0106 10 J11n 102 0130 10 J11l 76 0138 --- -- --- --- -- ---
31 Hly 11 0 0142
--- --- --- ---
31 11oy 122 0085 --- -- --- --- --- ---
19 N1y 8 l 0149 13 Jun C 0258 J1J
13 Jill 40 0391 --- -- --- -- --- --
17 K1y 76 0202 --- -- --- --- --- --
20 N1y 8 1 0152 16 J1Jn C C 0163 JJ
H Jim 55 0141 13 Jul 40 0375 --- -- --- --- --- ---
17 Klly 76 0142 15 J11n 91 0123 12 JIJl 53 0224 -- --- --- ---
15 Moy 67 0107 2 J11n 107 0119 --- -- --- -- --- --
2 Jim 110 0244
--- --- --- ---
6 Hay 96 0099 1 Jun 122 0 124
Adult recoveries q observed--cu111ulati ve
iot1--2-yr--3-yr--yr ltnogt m m ltXgt_
--- --- ---
312 001 057 637 000 120 439 000 088
--- --- ---
12 000 004 --- -- --- ---
987 000 191 1760 000 326 1447 000 256 --- --- --- --
310 000 055
--- ---
-- --- ---
1 062 0 02 138 1i54 000 218 836 000 103 --- --- --- ---
335 000 043
--- --- --- ---
2340 002 t50 687 000 094
1430 000 1i2 2056 000 126 --- -- --- ---
1 368 001 on4692 ooo 240 8981 000 420
--- --- ---
602 001 058 2485 001 236 --- --- --- --
183 001 037 --- --- ---
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_ Binary coded wire tag Ag=Agency code Dl=Data 1 code D2=Data 2 code
E More complete information is available from Dawley et al 1985b or thereleasing agency Table 21 HatHatchery
=_ Comparisons limited to groups with less than 20 difference in mean weight at release
f Number is actual represents catch for effort adjusted combined replicates
I Average flow including Columbia River at Bonneville Dam Willamett5 ewisand Cowlitz Rivers on week of median fish recovery kcms g 1000 m second
Catch additionally adjusted for river flow to represent catch at 7 kcms
z Percent of total release calculated from observed recovery No data(-) meanseither adults have yet to return were not collected or were not obtained from fishery agencies prior to analysis Comparisons between groups released at different times may be erroneous because of differences in ocean distribution unequal fishing effort or sampling effort
BKD and high pre-release mortality from low dissolved oxygen
J Poor health
118
0
400
em
350
300
250 e (8) (1) bulllt91 bull (1)
Juvenile recoveries --
200
C Y =2406 + 25 lOX 7 a
Al121
iii
gt 150 - e (3)
J u
Adult recoveries a em
100
s
-bull- Adult recoveries
50 -bull- Juvenile sampling
(nl No of comparisons
bull (4)
(12) bull (5) bull (2)
0 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
e(2)
-50Dams bypassed (number)
bull (1)
-100
Figure 39--Linear regression of mean survival increase with number of dams bypassed in downstream migrationfrom Jones Beach recoveries and adult recoveries
Delayed releases of subyearling chinook salmon could not be compared because of effects of size differences
Stocks--Estuarine sampling showed some significant differences in catch between marked groups from studies evaluating the success of various fish stocks (Table 32) In l of 4 years yearling chinook salmon of tule stock showed a significantly greater catch rate than late fall stock released from Bonneville Hatchery (Hansen 1982) Yearling chinook salmon releases from Klickitat Hatchery of wild stock and Wells stock were each different from the Klickitat stock but not different from one another Wallowa stock steelhead showed greater catches than Wells stock released at Lyons Ferry A few other stocks showed significant differences but fish size was unequal and in each instance a greater percentage of the larger fish were captured Comparisons were limited to groups with less than 20 difference in body weight at release
Juvenile catch percentages correlated well with adult recoveries In 13 of 18 instances juvenile catches varied in the same direction as adult recoveries and in 9 of 12 instances where adult recoveries were significantly different (Table 32)
Nutri tion--Estuarine recovery data of fish from diet studies showed statistically significant differences which generally correlated with benefits of survival observed from adult recovery data In 2 years of a 7-year study with coho salmon at Sandy Hatchery (Westgate et al 1983b) estuarine recovery data showed statistically higher recoveries from individual diet groups which correlated with statistically higher adult survival (Table 33) One diet group showed statistically lower recoveries but showed no decreased survival in adult recovery data Recoveries of subyearling chinook salmon from a 4-year study at Bonneville Hatchery (Westgate et al 1983b) showed s ta tis tically higher benefits for one diet in 2 of the 3 years for which it was tested and adult recoveries also showed survival benefits for both however only one was significant (Table 33) Recoveries of subyearling chinoo salmon from a high salt concentration diet at Spring Creek Hatchery (Leek) showed statistical differences in 1983 and not in 1982
Several diets showed statistically significant differences as adults which were not apparent from juvenile recovery data
Rearing Density--Differences in relative survival during migration to the estuary were examined for yearling chinook and coho salmon groups cultured
S Leek USFWS Little White NFH Cook WA 98605 pers commun
120
Table 32--Catch percentages of marked fish from stock comparison studies
---------------------middot -------------
--------
---------
---------middottlime infoncition ______ Recovery _infor1cition__
___ __ __ Togo Adult recoveries e
CAgDlD2 Jones Deoch d observed-c1J11Jlotive Brond Nuriber Dote Size c roirwfnteFispf 1n9- tcitor-irr--Tff--1yrSyr
(Loe Sy1 Rotl Sourc __ e_b __ ____ SlgtL_tthoul (do1lttl ltnolli) (no) lnql ltlLinl_l l)_i_gt _iiLJll-
SUBYEARLING CHINOOK SALHOH
072138 072142
Bonneville Hot Tule 515 09 Hov 81 11 J Lote foll 507 11 J
-- --- --- - -----072139 072141
Bonneville Hot Tule Late foll
500 09 Nov 81 498
--- -- --- --- --- -- -- -- --- -- - ---072363 Bonneville Hat Tule 459 01 Nov 82 072548 Lole fGll 507
-- -- -- --- - -- - - -- -- middot- -056101 LilWhSolHit Spring Cr 1512 24 loy 78 63010342
050346-48 LitWhSol 1488 25 lay 78 --- ---
------ --- -- -- -- --- --- - ---
632611 Pr Rop Spaw Ch Production 2041 24 Hoy 83 632612 Wild 2024 21 Jun 83
-- --9 5 9 3
-- --11 119 12 105
- ---119
us -- ---
84 63
YEARLING CHINOOK SttON
07 1657 Bonneville Hat Tule 47 9 13 Nor 79 7 0716i61 Leite foll 32 7 8
071736 Bonneville H11t Tule 48 l 13 Hor 80 6 071733 Late fall 493 9
072140 Bonneville Hot Tule 51 9 17 Har 82 7 072143 Late f111 506 7
072701 Bonneville H11t Tule 375 08 Hor SJ 7 072547 LGte foll 499 23 Hor 83 6
631732 KlickitQt Hot Klickitat 946 JO Hor 79 10 631734 Wind River 1033 10 631750 Wells 942 10 091663 Horion Fks Hat Carson 502 13-15 Har 78 15 09li02 Minto Sonti1m 496 13
0717252629 Morion FksHot Corson 1443 03 Apr 79 16 071730-32 Hinto Santi1111 1482 19
072249-51 Harian Fks Hot Carson 1471 16-24 Apr 81 14 07225253 Hinto S1ntirl11 819 14
-- -- -- -- -- -- - --- - -- - -- - --072525-27 ltorion Fks Hat Corson 1508 15-17 l14r 82 16 072528-30 Ninto SantioD 1487 18-20 Har 82 14
-- -- --- -- --- --- --- -- --- -- -- -- --- --07 2044 Oakridge Hat Oakridge 307 10 Hor 80 8 072042 Dexter 307 9
072225 Oakridge Hat Oakridge 072305 Dexter
266 16 Har 81 299
7 7
050628 War Springs Hot Early Sum 109 07-14 Apr 80 19 050627 Late S1J11 1680 19
------- - --- --- --- -- ----- -- --
050824 Wara Springs Hot Early SuD 32J 02 Apr 81 8 050822 Lite Su11 667 B
--- --- -- -- -- -- -- --- --- --- -- -- -- --050825 Wara Spring Hat Eirly Sua 1860 09 Apr Bl 20 050823 L9te Sua 1702 09-16 Apr 81 18
filsillIMgt
051334 Hager111n Hot A stock 391 18-20 Apr 83 5 Upper Sal R
102460 H0Jlt1an Hot EFk Sal R -- --- - -- - --
LAS l Lyons Ferry Hat LD S 2
B stock
lollowa We lls
376 12-13 Apr 83 4
546 01-20 Hay 83 4 516 4
------------------------------------------
121
5 l
0041 0024
7 001 4 001
-- --- ------4 0085 1 0013
-- --4 0559 2 0445
- --328 0343
334 03S8 -- -- --- ---
141 0096 86 0103
105 0393 62 0403
8 002 -12 002 -
25 000 001 002 002
10 000 001 001 001
471 031 097 098 514 039 129 157
- -- -- -- - ----- -
52 0224 158 012 033 033 70 0322 140 007 026 028
-- - --- --- -- - ---52 0435 38 007 48 OJil 20 004
- --- - -- --- - ---44 0226 13 0052
-- --- --- --- --- --- --
45 0064 232 003 018 025 80 0109 269 001 018 026 87 0131 361 015 035 038
--- -- -- --- -- --- --- -- --17 0056 18 000 001 004
0089 3 000 001 001 --- -- -- --- -- -- -- --- --
90 0078 67 000 middot002 005 101 0088 524 001 019 035
--- - -- ----- --- -- -- ---
24 0031 49 000 003 -27 0036 59 002 007 -
-- -- -- --- -- -- --- --
51 0041 0 000 56 0053 3 000 -
--- -- --- --- --- --- --- ---25 0202 r 006 054 089 20 0148 339 007 067 110
-- -- -- -- - --- - -- -9 0063 91 002 034 -
14 0104 145 004 048 -
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -
5 0086 126 115 51 0059 1351 080
- -- -- ---- -- - --
4 0027 0 000 000 20 0062 2 000 000 -
-- --- -- --- --- -- --- -- ---16 0027 3 000 000 -
48 0042 10 000 001
104 0363
- - -- -- -- - -
102 0316-- -- -- -- -- -- --
68 0104 7 0016
-------------------
Table 32--continued
a More complete information available from Dawley et al 1985b or releasing agency Table 21 Binary coded wire tags Ag=Agency code Dl=Data 1 code and D2=Data 2 code Color coded wire tags begin with WH and each two digits thereafter represent a color Brands are represented by the following Loc=Location on fish Sym=Brand symbol and Rot=Rotation of symbol For abbreviations symbol and descriptions see Dawley et al 1985b
E More complete information is available from Dawley et al 1985b or the releasing agency Figure 2_1 Abbreviatiqns _used are listed Ch=Channel EFk=East Fork Fks=Forks Hat=Hatchery Lit=Little Pr=Priest R=River Rap=Rapids Sal=Salmon Spaw=Spawning Wh=White and = Released at
5 Only groups with average body weight lt 20 difference were compared
E Actual catch and adjusted percentage catch purse seine plus beach seine combined replicates
_I Percent of total release calculated from observed recovery No data(-) means either adults have yet to return were not collected or were not obtained from fishery agencies prior to analysis Comparisons between groups released at different times may be erroneous because of differences in ocean distribution unequal fishing effort or sampling effort
122
Table 33--Jones Beach catches and adult recoveries for marked fish from studiesof nutrition 1977-1983
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Release information Adult recoveries cl
Juvenile catches at _observed--CUBUlotive fog 9 Nu1ber Dole Jones Beach b_ total 2 yr 3 yr 4 yr
_j9LPJLll Dj_t SQIf e lt hQ1Jg91tl__JQ91__J l (no) m m lt --------------
QtlQ_jALKOH
090513 Herring 8 Sandy HatJj 606 06 Hay 77 23 0076 1060 000 175 -
Oi0606 Herring 4 soy 4 572 24 0086 1330 000 233 -
090607 Herring 6X soy 2 588 26 0091 1245 000 212 -
090608 Soy 8 600 25 0085 1212 000 202 -
090609 Herring 2X soy 6 602 24 0081 1238 000 206 -
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- - -- --- -- --- --- --- --- --- --- -- --- --- ---
091644 Soy 6X herring 2 Sandy Hat 332 02 lfoy 78 25 0091 908 009 273 -
091645 Herring 8 340 14 00S1 848 00S 249 -
091646 Soy 4 herring 4 325 16 o063 832 007 256 -
091647 Soy 2 herring 6 336 26 0102 865 009 257 -
091648 Soy ax 337 18 0072 859 007 255 -
--- --- --- --- --- --- -- -- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
091649 Menhaden oil 6 Sandy Hat 340 04 lfoy 78 21 0080 835 005 246 -
091650 Soy oil 6 333 24 0096 759 006 228 -
091651 Herring oil 6 344 19 0074 748 004 217 -
091652 nchovy oil 6X 330 22 0085 771 003 234 -
-- --- -- --- - --- --- -- -- --- -- --- -- --- - -- -- -- -- -- --
071749 Anchovy oil 67 Sandy H11t 275 01 Hay 79 28 0133 343 006 125 -
071750 tlenhoden oil 6 274 25 0114 521 007 190 -
071751 Soy 6 275 32 0 151 622 007 226 -
071752 Herring 6 279 28 0121 343 006 123 -
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- - --- --- --- -- --- - ---
07203133 OHP 4 Sandy Hot 504 01 Hoy 80 31 0139 367 001 073 -
07203234 OHP 2 fresh I frozlfl 507 JJ 0140 531 001 105 -
07203536 OHP 2 Acid 504 32 0131 446 001 088 -
07203738 OHP 2 frozen 525 33 0129 541 002 103 -
--- -- -- --- --- -- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -- -- - -- -- -- ---
07225557 OHP 2 frozen Sandy Hot 565 01 Hiiy 81 37 0104 750 001 133 -
07225658 OHP 2 Acid 553 32 0076 735 002 133 -
07225962 Presscake 577 59 0144 1036 001 180 -
07226063 OHP 4 578 35 oon 927 001 160 -
072261 12301 OHP 2 frozen amp fresh 587 42 0091 900 001 1 53 -
-- - --- -- - --- --- -- - --- - --- - --- -- -- -- -- ---
07255058 OHP 2 Sondy Hat 542 30 Apr 82 86 0165 709 012 131 -
07255154 DHP 4 549 BO 0151 642 013 117 -
07254957 PC-6 52l 84 0170 759 020 146 -
07255355 PC-4 543 58 ouo 726 014 134 -
07255256 Abernathy 545 79 0147 743 009 136 -
-- -- -- --- - --- - --- -- --- - --- - --- -- -- -- -- -- -
07273136 OHP 2 Sandy Hat 1096 29 Apr 83 78 0071 07273235 Sal Heal 1095 67 0062 07273334 Aberniithy 1088 73 0068
123
Table 33--continued
SIJBYEARLING CHINOOK SALNOH
07213334 011P 2 Bonneville HatW 1005 27 Hoy 80 26 0044 39 ooo 003
07213536 OJtP 4 975 50 0090 31 ooo 003-- --- --- --- -- --- --- --- -- --- -- --- --- --- --- --- --- -- --- - --
07234142 OHP 2 Bonneville Hat 1024 12 lioy 81 90 0104 61 000 006 07234344 OrP 4 1050 114 0132 9S 001 009 07234546 Presscoke 1019 99 0121 42 000 004 --- --- --- --- -- --- --- -- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -- --- ---
0712414 15 OtP 2 Bonneville Ha 1041 04 Aln 82 84 0 081 07241617 011P 5 ltpresscake) 1066 91 0090 - - -- --- -- --- -- --- --- --- - -- -- --- --- -- --- -- -- --
07272930 OHP 2 Bonnevi lie lGt 1000 04 Hoy 83 171 0171 07272728 OHP 4 1008 172 0171 --- --- --- --- -- --- --- -- -- --- -- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -- ---
05105556 n Salt Spring Creek Hotiy 896 15 Apr 82 135 0173 05105354 Control 917 139 0174 -- --- --- --- -- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --
0511 4243 7J Salt Spring Creek Hot 1000 28 Apr 83 136 0 136 05114445 Control 1040 171 0164
----------------------------------------------------
Binary coded wire tag Ag=Agency code Dl=Doto 1 code a nd D2=1)(lto 2 code b Number is actua l catch catch adjusted for effort combined replicates sJ Percent of total release calculated f robull observed recovery No doto (-) eons either adults hove
yet to return or were not collected or were not obtained fro fishery ogencies prior to onolysis Coaporisons between groups releosed ot different thes 11oy be erroneous because of differences in ocean distribution llnequal fishing effort or so1pling effort
Al Jeon Legosse ODFW Sandy Hatchery 39800 SE Fish Hatchery Rood Sondy Oregon 97055 1 Steve Lee USFWS Little White Salmon NFH Cook Washington 98605
124
004
003
at various densities of fish per volume of water or per rate of water exchange (Table 34) bull Estuarine recovery data for coho salmo rom Eagle Creek Hatchery over a 3-year test series 1981-1983 (Holway-) showed statistically significant benefits related to lower rearing density which were also correlated to significantly increased survival to adulthood However estuarine recovery data of juveniles from single tests and series of tests from six other studies showed no correlation with density even though adult recovery data showed strong positive correlation with decreased rearing density statistically significant for three of five studies One of the two groups which showed negative correlation was highly significant whereas the other was poorly correlated
Juvenile recoveries showed differences among study groups which varied in the same direction as adult recovery data less than 50 of the time which suggests that estuarine catch data are generally not sensitive in the prediction of adult survival trends for rearing density studies
Catch Rate Models for Suby earling Chinook Salmon
Marked fish representing all the stocks of subyearling chinook salmon cultured in the Columbia River basin from 1978 to 1982 (Environmental and Technical Services Div 1983) allowed a detailed assessment of variables affecting estuarine catch percentages and development of a catch rate model Future catch data may be compared to model predictions for examining the relative success of survival during migration Correlations with several variables were examined for upriver release groups ( upstream from John Day Dam gt RKm 347) downriver release groups (downstream from John Day Dam) combined groups and individual stocks Variabes examined were fish size (no lb) movement rate (kmday) river flow (m second) date of recovery (Julian date) and distance of migration [release si (RKm) - capture site (RKm)]r Catch percentages were standardized to 7000 m second river flow for all data 1977-1983 (Table 34) The equations are given in the original data units but the statistics were calculated using normalized units Catch percentages of upriver released fish showed a significant linear relationship with distance of migration fish size and river flow This relationship is Y = 01645 - 00001760X1 -00009868X2 + 001569X
12 (in normalized units
the equation is Y = -02103X1 -03428X2
+ 05350X3 Ra = 053 F = 1276 at2 19 df with P lt 0001) Wliere Y is catch percentage x
1 is distance of
migration x2
is fish size and x3
is river flow
In some cases catch percentages for individual stocks showed a significant relationship to particular variables Data from groups reared at Bonneville and Little White Salmon Hatcheries (primarily downstream releases) Priest Rapids Spawning Channel and Hagerman Hatchery ( primarily upstream releases) provided the following relationships
2f J Holway USFWS Eagle Creek NFH Rt 1 Box 610 Estacada OR 97205 pers commun
125
Table 34--Jones Beach catches and adult recoveries for marked fish from studies of rearing density 1977-1983
------------------------
---T----Releose information ________ _ Adult recoveries c Juvenile catches observed--cuaulotive
fig Q (AgU17D2)
Brand l=lti ti flqt_gt _____ s __ ou r ce ______ rsi ty
Nuaber Date Jones Beoclngtr rora--ryr-l_yr_l_yr-S-yr-lt thougt Cdamott_rgt (no) ltIT (nogt m (gt ltXgt lgt-
YEARLING CHINOOK SALMON
13091112 Cowlitz H11t Hitd 1768 08 Har 77 80 1309 14 1104 Ne - 1235 55 13130104 low 567 24 -- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
631709 10 Cowlitz Hat ao lbsg11l1ind 1774 08 Har 78 233 6317 17 18 65 lbsgalin- 1407 134 63171112 60 lbsgalin 1153 162 63161213 30 lbsgalmin 560 61 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
RA T 1 Koosk i1 H11t 029 lbsft tine 147 04-12 Apr 83 11 RA T 2 008 lbsft Yin- 4 s2
COHO SnLHON
632420-24 632425-29 632440-44 632435-39 632445-49 632430-34 -- --- ---
632613-17 632618-22 632638-42 632623-27 632628-32 632633-37 --- --- ---
050826 050828 050827 --- --- ---
05103940 05103738 05103536 -- --- ---
05113334 05113536 05113738 -- --- ---
09060204
Cowlitz Hot
--- --- ---
Cowlitz H1t
--- --- ---
200 lbsg11min 198 lbsglmin 127 lbsgaliriin 126 lbsg11aiin 122 lbsgalmin 11 6 lbsgal11in --- --- --- ---
229 lbsgalmin 160 lbsgaliriin 150 lbsgl1in 143 lbsgalmin 11 7 lbsg11ltrin 92 lbsgalmin --- --- --- ---
510 529 532 512 517 523 ---
524 511 515 521 517 521 ---
Eagle Cr Hat 045 lbsft 3inf 1278 0 30 lbsft in - 837 015 lbsft in 436
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Eagle Cr Hat 045 lbsft 3in 1349 030 lbsft in 850 015 lbsft in 391
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Eagle Cr Hat 045 lbsftin 1233 030 lbsft in 802 015 lbsft3in 412
--- -- --- --- --- --- --
SQndy Ht1t 435 0905150603
Hit He 474
0905140601 Low_g 507 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
632513-17 Woshougal Hat 136 lbsgilmind 501 632518-22 121 lbsgolimin - 508 632523-27 98 lbsgali1in 507 632528-32 86 lbsgGlmin 503 632533-37 66 lbsgulmin 483 632538-42 54 lbsgalmin 401 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
632713-17 Washougal Hot 143 lbsgalmin 521 632708-12 125 lbsqalmin 20 632703-07 106 lbsgalmin 513 632661-63270102 88 lbsg11min 494 632656-60 68 lbsgalllsin 485 632651-55 60 lbsgal11in 398 --- --- --- --- --- --- -- --- --
050934-374445 Willard Hi1t 200 gplpd 1372 050928-314243 400 gpnipdh 13530509323338-41 600 gpmpd- 1317
----------- -------------------
03 Hay 82 95 72
101 92 95 81
--- --- --- --
03 Hay BJ 84 72 80 71 86 80
--- --- --- ---
22 Apr 81 180 pt uU
62 --- --- --- --
06 Hoy 82 229 139 71
--- -- --- ---
04 Hoy 83 154 110 68
--- --- --- ---
27 Apr 77 16 14 15
--- --- --- ---
5 Hay 82 44
34 32 38 40 29
--- --- --- ---
27 Hay 83 38 32 32 30 24 29
-- --- --- ---
07 J1Jn 83 111 112 123
126
0132 2008 035 090 114 0107 2124 051 135 172 0111 896 o74 109 158--- --- -- --- --- --- --
0418 5626 114 270 J17 0316 4418 132 323 383 0448 4379 142 328 380 0305 2280 151 349 407 --- --- --- -- ---
0075 0050
0196 436 015 oe5 0143 591 022 112 0197 671 031 126 0182 556 027 1 09 0192 610 029 118 0158 446 022 085 --- --- -- --- --- ---
0174 0145 0159 0152 0176 0161 --- --- --- --- --- ---
0185 1702 014 133 0219 1106 016 1 32 0186 678 021 156 --- --- --- --- --- ---
0179 766 001 057 0178 509 002 060 0203 279 014 071 --- --- --- --- --- ---
0135 0155 0187
--- --- --- --- --- ---
0076 888 008 204 0057 814 008 171 0063 808 006 159 --- --- --- --- --- ---
0101 183 001 035 0084 194 ooo 038 0072 254 001 049 0094 268 001 052 0094 163 001 033 0093 167 001 032 --- --- --- --- --- ---
0084 0073 0076 0071 0064 0085 -- --- -- -- -- ---
0103 0099 0089
Table 34--continued
_ More complete information available from Dawley et al 1985b or releasing agency Table 21 Binary coded wire tags Ag=Agency Dl=Data I code and D2=Data 2 code Color coded wire tags begin with WH and each two digits thereafter represent a color Brands are represented by the following Loc=Location on fish Sym=Brand symbol and Rot=Rotation of symbol For abbreviations symbol and descriptions see Dawley et al 1985b
E_ Actual number captured beach and purse seine percent adjusted for effort replicates combined
E Cumulative percent of total release calculated from observed recovery No data(-) means either adults have yet to return were not collected or were not obtained from fishery agencies prior to analysis Comparisons between groups released at different times may be erroneousbecause of differences in ocean distribution unequal fishing effort or sampling effort
E_ Robert Foster WDF 115 General Administration Building Olympia WA 98504 Production densities about 20 and 14-18 lbgalmin for Cowlitz and Washougal Hatcheries respectively
_ Ted Bjornn University of Idaho Idaho Co-op Fisheries Research Moscow ID 83843 Production density about 03 lbsft3in
_ Jamieson Holway USFWS Eagle Creek Hatchery
Route 1 Box 610 Estacada OR 97203 Production density about 045 lbsft in
Fa_ Jean Legasse ODFW Sandy Hatchery 39800 SE Fish Hatchery Road Sandy OR 97055
E_ Joe Banks USFWS Abernathy SCDC 1440 Abernathy Road Longview WA 98632 Production density about 400 galmin per pond
127
Bonneville Hatchery
Y = 02311 + 002867X1 - 0001399X2
R = 079 F = 2417 at 2 5 df with P lt 0005
Little White Salmon Hatchery
Y = 02511 + 000404SX1 - 0002958X2
middot2 Ra = 044 F = 738 at 2 6 df with P lt 0025
Priest Rapids Spawning Channel
Y = 001163 + 001310X3
R2 = 080 t = 569 at 8 df with P lt 0001
For the Priest Rapids Spawning Channel distance of migraton and fish size did not contribute significantly to percent catch although Ra = 077 for the fullmodel
Hagerman Hatchery
Y = 002554 + (23632E-6) log x3
R2 = 096 t = 1065 at 5 df with P lt 0001
The full model with a sample of nine observations did not yield a significant relationship (R - 030 at 2 6 df with 010 lt P lt 025) A plot of percent catch versus river flow showed two outlying observations and the above relationship was obtained when these were trimmed from the data set Although this relationship is highly significant the data set is too small to serve for anything but a general guide
We hypothesize that cultural biological and environmental variables independent of those examined have great effects on estuarine catch percentage and that sampling efficiencies are different for individual stocks ie from different hatcheries For that reason compiled catch data from lower river released fish groups do not provide data which are consistent for representing numbers of individuals in the river However assessment of catch data from single stocks in some instances provided data consistent enough to develop a baseline of expected percentages in relation to those variables examined Groups released upriver provided more consistency between stocks for a single variable examined
128
Survival of Subyearling Chinook Salmon to the Estuary
Measurement of survival from release site to the estuary was attemped for fall chinook salmon cultured at the largest hatcheries in the river system to examine variations in relation to river conditions and specifics of culture Hatcheries more than 150 km from Jones Beach were used to provide a migration distance long enough for survival differences to become apparent From 1978 to 1983 fish groups were branded at all hatcheries possible and transported by truck to release sites about 40 km upstream from Jones Beach Catches of the branded fish were compared to those of tagged fish which migrated from the respective hatchery to Jones Beach The branded group was assumed to have 100 survival due to the short distance of migration and the difference of catch percentage between the tag and brand groups was assumed to represent survival difference
Variation of survival estimates was high and seemed unrelated to known variables Adult recovery data were not correlated with survival estimates and as a result those estimates provide no data which at present appear relevant for analysis
Decreased Catches Related to the Eruption of Mount St Helens
Jones Beach catch data indicated a substantial loss of subyearling chinook salmon during the period immediately following the eruption when the river was highly turbid (34 to 2800 Jackson Turbidity Units) and an increase in water temperature occurred In 1980 purse and beach seine catches (145650 fish) were 51 lower than the average catch for the previous 2 years--284267 in 1978 and 309267 in 1979 In both 1978 and 1979 subyearling fall chinook salmon released from Bonneville and Little White Salmon Hatcheries provided substantial peaks at Jones Beach during late May and June catches were depressed even though 186 million fish were released from the two hatcheries (Fig 40) The recovery rates of marked fish from releases in 1980 (0083 and 0072 for Bonneville and Little White Salmon fish respectively) were less than half of the 1978 and 1979 averages (0169 and o 280 respectively) Adult recovery rates for the marked groups from Bonneville Hatchery were confounded by a mix of fish rearing conditions (Tanner Creek vs well water) which has in the past caused different rates of survival to adulthood Adult recoveries from groups of Little White Salmon Hatchery were exceptionally low for all years and no difference was detectable for groups which migrated in 1980
While dead or moribund fish were not seen during sampling observations indicated that 15 juvenile salmonids captured on 28 May 1980 had irritation of gill filaments characterized by heavy mucus secretions laden with particulate matter The particulate matter and mucus observed may have been indicative of mortality in other individuals which would have contributed to decreased catch Fourteen fish were examined on 2 June and their gill filaments appeared normal Other researchers performing bioassays found that suspended ash from Mount St Belens affected salmonid gills and caused mortality (Stober et al 1980 and Newcomb and Flagg 1983)
129
45 1978
Total catch= 284 26 7
40
IBonnen Hatchey
35 Little White Salmon
Hatchery
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
30 1979
Total catch =309267 c
25
20
15
10
5
0
15 1980
Total catch= 145650
10
5
0 14 19 16 13
Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
Month
Figure 40--Weekly beach seine catches of subyearling chinook salmon at Jones Beach 1978-1980 with shaded area representing fish captured from Bonneville and Little White Salmon Hatcheries
130
Characteristics of Wild Stocks
Detection of the various stocks of wild fish was impossible because they could not be identified unless marked Some wild fish however were tagged as part of various research projects fish from the Lewis (Norman 1984) Deschutes (Lindsay et al 1982) Warm Springs (Lindsay et al 1982) and John Day Rivers (Knox et al 1984) were seined marked and returned to their natal stream for rearing Recoveries at Jones Beach (Table 35) provided for some assessment of timing catch rates and physical condition
Timing Size and Catch Rates--Migrational timing size and catch percentage data for marked wild migrants were comparable to data obtained from hatchery reared fish Wild yearling migrants (35 total fish) had similar timing to hatchery stocks March and April for Lewis River fish from the west side of the Cascade Mountains and May and June for John Day Deschutes and Warm Spring Rivers on the east side of the Cascades Mean fork lengths ranged from 117 to 142 mm catch rate averages for fish from each tributary ranged from 0014 to 0119 Timing of wild subyearlings from the Lewis River (2209 total fish date range of median fish recovery= 22 July-23 August) was later than for migrants from the Deschutes River (84 fish date range of median fish recovery = I June-12 July) Overall catch rates (0069 to 0353) and mean fork lengths (91 mm to 106 mm) of wild subyearlings were similar to hatchery fish
Timing observations of size-graded wild fish from the Lewis River in 1983 indicated that date of passage at Jones Beach was related to individual size From 6 to 11 June personnel of WDF seined graded into two size groups
(45-54 mm and gt 54 mm) tagged and returned to the Lewis River 96444 wild fall chinook salmon (Norman 1984) Average fork lengths of the two mark groups at tagging were 493 and 584 mm Recoveries of these fish at Jones Beach indicated a distinct timing difference (Table 36) the dates of median fish recovery were 20 July for the large fish and 9 August for the smaller fish Mean fork lengths at recovery were nearly identical (846 and 843 mm respectively) Reimers and Loeffel (1967) suggested that in the Columbia River tributaries juvenile salmonids must reach a minimum size before migrating-size varying in different streams Our observation of the Lewis River fish seems consistent with this hypothesis
Movement Rates--Movement rates for wild fish were generally not representative of hatchery fish movement rates past Jones Beach because dates for beginning of migration were unknown comparisons were not made
Conclusions
1 Migration timing of juvenile salmonids entering the estuary wasaffected by dates of release from hatcheries and other factors which altered movement rates In some instances fall-released fish groups overwintered upstream from Jones Beach and migrated in the spring size of fish and stock differences appear to influence the migration timing
131
Table 35--Summary of catches migrational timing and fork lengths of marked wild juvenile chinook salmon populations captured at Jones Beach 1977-1983
------------------------------------------------------------
Nuked gro112s Date rClllge Hecin fork Overoll Totol Nullber of Total Recoveries Date rcinge of fro111 10 to length aean forK
River of Age at groups groups fish adjusted q aediCln fish 90 fish range by length origin capture 1arked captured marked ltnogt ( recoveries recovery group (111)
(111) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Day subyearling 0 yeGrling 35 1 5 t 90305 13 00144 4 Hoy-17 Jun 30 Apr-17 Jun 115-129 118
Deschutes subyearling 16 10 121656 84 00690 1 Jun-12 J11l 1 Jun-17 Aug 97-115 106 yearling 10 5 4715 8 01186 4 Hoy-16 Hoy 4 ttay-16 Moy 130-150 142
HFk le11is subyeorling 23 23 625803 2209 03530 22 Jul-23 Aug 25 tloy-18 Oct 76-97 91 yearling 4 I 10 17 ltor-25 Apr 17 tlor-30 ffay 110-128 117
llara Springs subyeGr ling 0
yeGrling 12 1 3 17667 V 4 00226 2 ltoy-4 Jun 2 tlay-5 Jun 107-145 122 --------------------
Adjusted for standard effort UO sets beach seine 5 sets purse seine 7 doysveekgt Hullher of fish recovered (odj11sted for effort) totol number of fish released (including those of groups which were not recovered)
111 Includes fish gro11ps mGrked as either yearlings or subyearlings ymiddotThree groups coded-wire togged os subyeorlings vere captured os yeorlings the following seGson ot Jones Beach j Fish captured were froa groups narked os subyeorlings llost fish froa those groups were captured the
previous yeor os subyearling
132
Table 36--Recoveries of wild subyearling chinook salmon at Jones Beach from
groups which were seined size graded marked and returned to the Lewis River by Washington Department of Fisheries personnel 6-11 June 1983
---------------------------------------------------------------------
___ Rlt 1 e1 se_ Info rn111 ti on ___ _ _____ Recoverx_Information __________ _ Me1n forllt
Size group No length ( t 11 g c o d e gt ( tho 1J s gt lt mm gt (Nobull)
Me1n forK
Adjusted _Recover_d1te __ length CY) 9 (10frac34) (50iO (90i0 (mm)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-_ 54mm 483 493 13 o565 15JrJ1 9AbullJg 30Aug _846
( Cgt327 37 gt
bullbull =middot 54mm 48 1 584 113 0362 9J1Jl 20Jul 16A1Jg 843
(632738)
_ Adj11sted middotfor s1mp ling effort
133
2 Movement rates of subyearling chinook salmon increase with increasesof river flow fish size distance of migration and Na+-K+ ATPase Correlation to these variables was high for lower-river stocks but low for upriver stocks Increased river flow also increased movement rates of yearling fish but other variables were not assessed because individual stocks were not consistently marked each year
3 Cessation of movement in the estuary did not occur yearling fishshowed no slowing of movement during passage through the estuary and into the ocean plume but subyearling chinook salmon did show a 30 decrease compared to rates from release site to Jones Beach The Columbia River estuary is not used as a rearing area by subyearling chinook salmon released upstream from Jones Beach
4 Variability among estuarine catches of replicate marked groups isconsistent with normal sampling statistics Consequently catch rate differences among replicates were used to evaluate differences between treatment and control groups to provide the greatest statistical precision Variability of adult recovery data from replicate groups appears higher than expected which suggests that subtle differences in culture impact adult return rates but are not observable from estuarine catch data
5 Diel movement behavior showed a generally consistent pattern for eachspecies thus comparable percentages of fish passing for the 24-h period were sampled during the 7-h morning period
6 River flow al terj sampling efficiency catch rates decreased anaverage of 85 per 1000 m second of increased flow
7 Sampling date fish size and distance of migration sometimesaffected the distribution of catch between the beach and purse seines such catch-rate comparisons should only be made be tween dissimilar groups if the distributions of catch are nearly equivalent
8 Estuarine sampling showed trends of significantly increased survivalfor migrants transported past dams late releases of coho salmon (June and early July) and larger size at release for yearling chinook salmon Smaller fish from some migrant populations disappeared prior to entering the estuary Minimum-size thresholds for migration and survival of Columbia River coho salmon and wild fall chinook salmon and Willamette steelhead were supported with Jones Beach sampling data
9 Particular groups from studies of fish stocks rearing densitiesand diets showed some survival differences in estuarine catches but generally differences among groups were not significant Highly significant differences in adult recoveries observed in studies of density and nutrition were not predictable from juvenile catch data
10 Catch rate models developed from the catch data for subyearlingchinook salmon provided a reasonably good predictor for certain hatcheries but a general model for lower-river fall chinook salmon was not possible due to differences be tween hatchery groups Models were not developed for yearling fish because groups at individual hatcheries were not marked consistently through the years
134
11 Survival of subyearling chinook salmon from release site to JonesBeach was evaluated for particular hatchery groups released in 1977-1983 but the precision of estimates was poor in relation to adult recoveries Apparently migration behavior of fish transported and then released close to the sampling site (controls) was inc onsistent in relation to those that migrated downstream (test) which caused substantial catch-rate differences
12 Losses of subyearling chinook salmon appeared to be substantialduring the date range in 1980 when highly turbid water from Mount St Helens wa s pas sing through the estuary
13 Wil d chinook salmon are diverse in their migration timing size andage structure--much the same as hatchery reared fish
135
STION IV ANCILLARY STUDIES
Food Consumption of Juvenile Salmonids Captured at Jones Beach
In trod uc tion
Quantity andor quality of food consumed during the migration of juvenile salmonids is critical to their survival Snyder (1980 found that inadequate nutrition reduced swimming stamina in juvenile coho salmon which could inhibit their ability to capture prey and avoid predators thus affecting their survival
Interspecific interaction between coho salmon and steelhead in small streams has resulted in agonistic behavior influencing food consumption and growth (Stein et al 1972 it may also influence stomach fullness values in Columbia River salmon smolts especially during years with a high degree of migrational overlap of species (Table 37)
Reduced feeding rate may be an indicator of poor health or stress which decreases survival to adulthood even when food is not 1 imi ted Nicholas et al (1979 speculated that release trauma and unfamiliarity with the estuarine environment in the Siuslaw River (Oregon resulted in a temporary inability of
middot coho salmon to utilize available food (50-90 empty stomachs
Reimers (1973 hypothesized that population density was a major cause of reduced growth rate for juvenile chinook salmon during a 3-month period of high population abundance in the Sixes River estuary ( Oregon during 1969 Bottom (1981) theorized a decline in carrying capacity of the Sixes River estuary for young salmon in mid-summer 1980 because of increased foraging pressure when population density was maximum
To evaluate nutrition interspecific interaction and smolt quality personnel of the the National Marine Fisheries Service examined the feeding habits of juvenile salmonids in the upper freshwater reach of the Columbia River estuary at Jones Beach (RKm 75) from 1979 to 1983
Specific objectives were as follows (1) document feeding rates (using stomach fullness as an index and diet composition for juvenile chinook and coho salmon and steelhead (2) identify those stocks with a large percentage of non-feeding individuals indicated by low stomach fullness values (3) examine effects of interspecific interaction on feeding (4) establish a relationship be tween visual quantifications of fullness and stomach content weights and (5) compare stomach content weights for juvenile fish at Jones Beach to those in other locations
Differences of stomach fullness between fish from various stocks captured at the same time (ie fish experiencing similar food availability and digestion rate) are directly related to differences in feeding rate The amount of food in a fishs stomach at any point in time is related to food consumption and digestion rates (Elliott and Persson 1978 Dill 1983) Digestion rate is controlled primarily by temperature (Elliott 1972) and by the composition of the food organisms (Elliott and Persson 1978)
136
Table 37--Dates of migrational peaks for juvenile salmonids at Jones Beach indicating migrational overlap 1977-1983
------------------------------------------------- ---------------
l _____________________ Weellt_ of _Qebull1k_mig r1 tion _____________________ _
19i7
1978
1979
1980
l981
l982
1983
Ch inooK s1lmon
subyeirling
21-27 May
11-17June
2-8 July
11-17 JtJne
6-10J1Jne
11-17 June
4-10JIJne
QI fl ye1rling
7-13tfoy
14-20M1y
7-13Moy
7-13M 11y
21-27M1y
14-20M11
Coho Steelhe1dpound
s1Lmon
14-20May 14-20Moy
28M1middot-3June 14-20M1y
14-20M1y 7-13M 11y
14-20M1y 7-13Miy
21-27M1y 21-27May
21-27May 21-27tfoy
From the dGte of median fish recovery not adJusted for river flow bull
I Timing b1sed on be1ch seine c1tches c Timing b1secl on purse seine catches
137
Methods
Salmonids sacrificed for CWT identification were used in feeding behavior evaluations Mark release information was used to separate species and year classes of sampled fish Subyearling chinook salmon are predominantly fall and summer races whereas yearling chinook salmon are predominantly a spring race (Van Hyning 1973)
Stomach Fullness--The subsamples of CWT fish were killed by immersion in a lethal concentration of ethyl p-aminobenzoa te Regurgitation during the killing process was not apparent Stomachs were excised (esophagus to pyloric caeca) and cleaned of external fat (Appendix Tables B2-5) In 1979 stomach were classified as full partial and empty A fullness value was assigned to represent the proportion of the total stomach length containing food (externally visible) A 1-7 scale was used to quantify the fullness observations as described by Terry (1977) =empty 2=trace of food 3one quarter full 4=half full S=three quarters full 6=full and 7=distended full Stomachs appearing empty were opened for examination and the Value 2 assigned when traces of food were observed For analysis stomachs judged empty or trace (1 or 2) were termed non-feeding Observations of stomach fullness were made from 3500 to 6000 juveniles annually and subsamples of stomachs containing food were individually preserved in 10 buffered formaldehyde solution for weight measurements and content analyses (Appendix Table B6)
Rec9rds included recovery date and location net set time fish weight2 and fork length (plusmn 05mm) fullness value holding time (duration between capture and fullness observation) and tag identification information (Appendix Table B7)
11olding time prior to fullness observation was approximately 90 minutes bull
Intraspecific comparisons of the proportions of non-feeding individuals within mark groups were made using the G-statistic--a log likelihood modification of Chi Square (Sokal and Rohlf 1981) Comparisons of stomach fullness means for fish groups with few non-feeding fish were made using analysis of variance Generally comparisons were not made 7or groups with more than 7 days between dates of median fish capture bull Similar or replicate tag groups showing no significant differences (Plt005) of mean fullness were combined for comparison to other groups When significant differences were found among three or more groups the Students t-tes t was used to isolate differences and the significance level of t was adjusted to
10 Weights of fish were obtained only for individuals collected in 1981 982 (plusmn 05 g) and 1983 (plusmn 0005 g) 11 Holding times were kept as low as possible by selecting only fish that were processed soon after capture Times were recorded for individuals examined in 1981 (after April) 1982 and 1983 12 Median data for stomachs observed may not correspond to the recapture date of the median fish for the entire tag group due to non-representative subsampling required to minimize holdirig times of the fish selected for stomach observations
138
P(005K where Kupper 1978)
K = number of means in the original F-testlf (Kleinbaum and
Frequency curves of fullness value were developed for all discrete marks with seven or more recoveries Ninety-five percent confidence intervals of mean stomach fullness values were plotted for each species by 3-day intervals (all tag groups combined) however the data are not necessarily representative of the total migrant population during the time period depicted
Diet Composition and overlap --Organisms were identified to the lowest practical taxon insects were further separated by metamorphic stage When dismembered prey were present parts were weighed together and counts were based upon the number of head capsules present Weight of unidentifiable material was not included in the total weight used for ranking relative importance in the diet Frequencies of occurrence (FO) numbers and weights were recorded for each prey taxon (Appendix Table BS) Non-feeding fish were omitted from analysis The index of relative importance IRI (Pinkas et al 1971) was modified to rank each taxon (IRI)
IRI = W X FO
where W = percent of the total content weight from all stomachs
FO = percent frequency of occurrence of all salmonids which
contain the designated taxon
The modified IRI was used to decrease bias resulting from large numbers of small food items (MacDonald and Green 1983) Percent IRI from the total IRI is presented
The degree of interspecific dietary overlap was assessed using biomass of food categories consumed using the formula developed by Morisi ta (1959) and modified by Horn (1966)
lJ The adjustment of the significance level is required to stabilize the standard error without increasing the probability of a Type I error for aposteriori comparisons among individual means
139
s 2 I X bull y
i=l i i CA =
s 2 s 2 I X + I y
i=l i i=l i
Where CA = overlap coefficient
i = individual food category
s = total number of food category
X and Y = proportion of the total diet for fish species X or Y contributed by food category i
Only food categories making u p more than 1 of the total w eight consummed were used for overlap calculations (Myers 1979) Values of C range from Oto 1 with O indicating no overlap and 1 indicating complete diet overlap
Proximate Analysis--For each fish species proximate analyses of stomach contents (percentage of protein ash and fat) were obt ained from pooled subsamples collected in May and June 1982 Analyses were contracted to a private laboratory
Stomach Content Weight--In 1982 stomach contents from about half of all marked fish were removed blotted dry and weighed to the nearest 50 micrograms 2480 total All weights were obtained within 4 months of capture
140
Non-Feeding Juveniles 1979-1981 and Some Effects from the Eruption of Mount St Helens
This portion of the report focuses on the definition of the range of stomach fullness in samples taken throughout the spring migration and identification of biological and environmental factors which appear related to high incidences of non-feeding Fish groups used in the analysis were released in diverse areas of the Columbia River basin (Fig 41)
In March-June 1979 1980 and 1981 water temperatures at Jones Beach ranged from 8 deg to 16 degC and later in the summer increased to 21 degC In July-September high water temperatures and long holding times possibly compromised the validity of stomach fullness observations (Elliott 1972) Presentation of fullness observations for groups captured after June of each year is limited to coho salmon captured in early July which were processed more rapidly (about 60 minutes)
The majority of juvenile salmonids were feeding when they entered the estuary (Fig 42) In both 1980 and 1981 steelhead had the lowest average fullness values (28 and 31) and coho salmon the highest (41 and 39)
The eruption of Mount St Helens produced a deluge of debris that arrived in the river at Jones Beach after daily sampling was complete on 19 May 1980 Turbidity in the river rose to 3000 Jackson Turbidity Units (JTU) which was 500 times normal turbidityl In attempting to determine the effect of this severe turbidity on feeding behavior of
salmonids entering the estuary species stock release location and timing of releases had to be carefully considered because data from various release groups indicated all of these factors could have a bearing on indices of stomach fullness
Subyearling Chinook Salmon--Trends of changing stomach fullness during the migrations were not observed however the percentage of empty stomachs in subyearling salmon during late May and into June 1980 increased with the onset of the turbid water A sudden increase in percentage of non-feeding fish was not observed in late May 1979 or 198 1 (Fig 43)
Observations from subyearling chinook salmon released at Abernathy Salmon Culture Development Center (SCDC) were omitted from computations of non-feeding fish shown in Figure 43 because Abernathy fish showed a non-feeding characteristic unrelated to the eruption In 1980 and 1981 Abernathy fish had significantly higher proportions of non-feeding individuals (51 and 44) than other fish groups captured during similar periods--0 and 9 respectively for Spring Creek Hatchery and Stayton Pond fish in 1980 and 10 and 5 respectively for Spring Creek and Bonneville Hatchery fish in 1981 (Figs 44 and 45) We believe the high percentage of non-feeding individuals among fish from Abernathy SCDC was associated with
l_ Measurements adjacent to or 3 km downstream from the mouth of the Cow litz River (RKm 106) collected by Robert McConnell NMFS PO Box 155 Hammond OR 97121
141
WASHINGTON
OREGON
LEGEID
Jgex Site RKa ladex Site
LOllR COLIRIBlA R I TRIBS IIILLltETJE R I TRIBS
1 Jones llffcb 75 22 VillQlette Falls 2 Beover Ter1ind 84 23 Ea9le Creek ampt y J ltbernatllr SCDC y 91 24 Srlon PCICld 4 LOiier KtlaN Heit 127 25 Foster for S s KolaN fdb Hat ) 141 Scnti111 ktgt d 6 Tocatle lht ) 160 26 lli11to (for llariaa 7 Colllitz Heit y 189 Forks Heit) 11 8 51111111 ia Heit s 213 27 Dexter ttor Odridge 1 lltshocaqtl 1kt ) 221 htI d
10 llon11tville IIG1 230 28 llcKerizit Hot J 11 Bonneville 1kt j 231 12 OxbOII 1kt d 231 IIESCllllES R I TRIBS 13 C4scade Hat - p 232 14 Canon IIGt 91 233 29 llara Springs Hat 9 15 Sandr Hot ti 235 30 Raand Butte Ho 16 litVhtSollkt 9 261 17 Villon IIGL 91 26B 18 Spring Creel Ho 91 269 19 Klickitat Ho l 358
20 Roel Creel 368 21 PlttelSOII Slouqll 448
a United States Fish 1111d Wildlife Service II Voshi11gton Deporbtnt of Fisherie1 c hshinqton hport1ent of Gue d Of191111 Deport11111t of Fish end llildlif1 ti ldalto Oeportaen of Fish ond Gan
IDAHO
RKa Jndex Site RK1
S116KE R I TRIBS
207 31 Tucannon Hat c 691 247 32 Lover Granite amp1 412 I for lltqerlQR Hatgt y 693
JJ hllOIICI IIGL fl 940 umiddot
QEMIIAlER R I TRIBS 452
34 Dllorshal Hd a 809 491 35 kooskio Hat y-492
SftlllON R I TRIBS
485 36 Rapid River Hot I 167506 37 S Fork Solun R lttor
llcCall Hotgt ti 1153
38 Pahsi1eroi R Cfor Nia91ro Springs Htt)I 1311
Figure 41--Columbia River basin showing the major tributaries fish
release sites hatcheries Jones Beach sampling site and Mount St Helens
142
1980
SUBYEARLING CHINOOK SALMON Er
u
plion
YEARLING CHINOOK SALMON J
COHO SALMON J
STEELHEAD
i=-f-ul_l _______ _
--
__ _ - __
1
__________ _
1 Emp1v----L-----------12
----------7-- 12 12 LMarchJ---April-----__--Mav------1----June----
1981 SUBYEARLING CHINOOK SALMON
11
_
1
u
11l_
-
_
-
_
-
_
-
_
-
-
_
-
_
-
-
i
_
-
middot
_
middot---bull
_
s
__ =_----_ --middotmiddotai __ __ _middot_bull___- __s-_-
middot_middot_lt_
YEARLING CHINOOK SALMON
t COHO SALMON lDis10ndldfu11----
-
----------
A-_- A_-fi-
-
-4 Halffulll----------f
M f15iC) __ F---i-=-----middot-- _ _-- ----
3 2
1 Emp--r---L----7r---L-----------------7
STEELHEAD lF-d_fu_ll
-
-
deg
-
--
-
---
-
--
--
-
-
-
-
-
L
-
=-
-
=-
-
_
-
-7_
cgt
-
-
__
-
2
Emp1y------2-----i----
12-----------7---
l-MarchJ----April----_ ___ Mav--- 1----June
Figure 42--Ninety-five percent confidence intervals of mean stomach fullness for salmonids captured at Jones Beach plotted by 3-day intervals March-June 1980 and 1981
i--i--
0
C
50
40
30
20
10
50
40
30
20
10
50
40
30
20
10
SUBYEARLING CHINOOK SALMON
1979
(221 _
lnl bull number of 1tom1eh1 umpltd
_ 1
_ r- Insufficient Samples for Analysis4 11s1_101
______ 101-bull
1980
1981
4 7 10 13
(181 (61
16 19
1471
I
St lfelen1 Turbidity
22 25
(911
1701
28
(681 (721
(881
(231
------------Mav----------- ----------
Figure 43--Percentage of non-feeding subyearling chinook salmon captured at Jones Beach during May and June 1979 1980 and 1981 Abernathy SCDC fish omitted
c
u u
0
SUBYEARLING CHINOOK SALMON 1980
40
30
20
10
40
30
20
10
40
30
20
10
SPRING CREEK
27 Muh n middot 115
SPRING CREEK la) brlow BonncbulliUbull 24 Mw 70
LOWER KALAMA
14 June n bull 180
SPRING CREEK
23 A1u1 11 103
BONNEVILLE Production) 01 Juur 52
LITTLE WHITE SALMON 19 Junr n 93
SPRING CREEK
13 Mav n - 54
BONNEVILLE la) Dietl 03 Junbullbull n 73
ABERNATHY la)
16Mav n bull 45
KLICKITAT
011 J1111fgt GI
1234567 1234567
Stomach fullness
STAYTON POND
IG M1v n SJ
DXBOWfa)
l1Jtrubull u 40
KEV TD FULLNESS VALUES
1 Em1uv S1on11ch 2 lrcr ol food 3 _ Ou1r1c full 4 bull Holl lull
5 Thrrc quarters lutl 6 bull Full 7 r DiJ1endrd Sh1chd = No1 cuinq
whrn carumd Unshr1rled = Eatng
whco cap1ued
Figure 44--Stomach fullness frequency curves for tag groups of subyearling chinook salmon captured at Jones Beach March-June 1980 Source and release site date of median fish recovery and number observed are included
145
the close proximity of the release site (RKm 91) to the recovery site (RKm 75)
Individual stocks of subyearling chinook salmon had high percentages of non-feeding individuals following the eruption Prior to the increase in t urbidity from the eruption 3 of the Stayton Pond fish captured were not feeding (n = 34) compared to 21 after the eruption (n = 19)--median recovery date at Jones Beach was 19 May 11 non-feeding (n = 54) (Fig 44) No other group allowed direct before and after comparisons but some groups passing Jones Beach following the eruption showed high proportions of non-feeding individuals Spring Creek Hatchery fish released downstream from Bonneville Dam had 30 non-feeding individuals and Bonneville Hatchery fish (production and diet study) had 21 and 24 non-feeding individuals respectively similar groups in 1981 had 1 0 non-feeding individuals (Figs 44 and 45)
By early J une 1980 food consumption by subyearling chinook salmon increased toward average fullness levels observed in the pre-eruption period and in the following year (Fig 42) even though water turbidity during June and July (35 to 130 JTU) remained s ubstantially higher than normal Fish captured during June and early July 1980 were primarily fish from Klickitat Oxbow Lower Kalama and Little White Salmon Hatcheries The non-feeding percentages for these groups were 10 11 23 and 26 respectively compared to 9 no marked group to compare 24 and 8 respectively in 1981 (Figs 44 and 45) Only fish from Little White Salmon Hatchery had significantly more non-feeding individuals in 1980 than in 1981
The hig h percentage of empty stomach s in early May 1981 (Fig 43) primarily resulted from an unexplained high percentage of non-feeding fish (27) from Spring Creek Hatchery (0 for a similar release group observed in 1980)
Yearling Chinook Salmon--Percentages of non-feeding individuals in marked groups of yearling chinook salmon varied between years unrelated to proximity of the release site or ef fects from the eruption In 1980 migrants which passed Jones Beach from March through mid-April had lower stomach fullness values than later migrants
From mid-March to mid-April 1980 tag ged yearling chinook salmon had significantly higher numbers of non-feeding fish than in 1981 (Fig 42) In 1980 these fish originated from South Santiam (two groups) Bonnevil le Oakrid ge and McKen zie Hatcheries The percentages of non-feeding fish in each group were 45 33 37 24 and 40 respectively In 1981 although sample numbers were less only the Cowlitz Hatchery group h ad comparable numbers of non-feeding fish (3 1) McKenzie and Oakrid ge Hatchery groups had only 6 and 14 non-feeding fish respectively (Fig 46)
From late April to early May 1980 the ag gregate fullness values of yearling chinook salmon increased (Fig 42) and percentages of non-feeding fish for most groups decreased (Fig 46) Yearling chinook salmon from Round Butte Carson and Warm Springs Hatcheries had 12 11 and 18
146
SUBYEARLING CHINOOK SALMON 1981
50
40
30
20
10
50
40
30
E 20
0
e u
10
50
40
30
20
10
SPRING CREEKlal SPRING CREEK la1 ABERNATHY lal 04 A11ul 29 A11hl 01 Mly Iii n rA II YI
STAYTON POND
u n bull 14S
BONNEVILLE
01JuM n bull 62
SPRING CREEK at Rock Cleek 19May bull 61
HAGERMAN bel- Bonnerille 01 Jll n 61
BONNEVILLE IProduotionl 21 nbull53
LITTLE WHITE SALMON(al 11 Junbull bull bull 163
1531
BONNEVILLE 01 II
BONNEVILLE Dietl 21May bull 8$
KLICKITAT
11 JunP bullmiddot 30
SPRING CREEK 11 tlw bullbull ti
KALAMA FALLS
31 Mav H 173
1541
HAGERMAN 11 Lower Granite 18 Junobull n I o
1234567 1234567 1234567 12 4567
50
40
30
20
10
LOWER KALAMA
19 June n bull 113
BONNEVILLE (brightsl 24 Junt n n
1234567 1234567
Stomach fullness
KEY TO FULLNESS VALUES
1 bull Emp1y Homaoh 2 bull T_ of food 3 bull Quarter full 4 bull Half lull 5 bull Three quarters lull 6bull full 7 bull Oi11tnded Shadid bull Not eating
when c1ptued Unhaded bull Eating
when cap1ured
Figure 45--Stomach fullness frequency curves for tag groups of subyearling chinook salmon captured at Jones Beach March-June 1981 Soure and release site date of median fish recovery and number observed are included
147
sect 0
YEARLING CHINOOK SALMON 1980
SOUTH SANTIAM middot SOUTH SANTIAM aio wu1_ Fallo n Foa IO- os- bullbullU bullbull31
ROUND BUTTE KOOSKIA
IOA OIi- 19
40
BONNEVILLE
middot-bullbull111
KOOSKIA 11e1-lloft-ai
osu bullmiddot 21
OAKRIDGE atOutat
10Aswtt
CARSON
mu
McKENZIE
13-
WARM SPRINGS
111111 bullbullII
i 30
20
10
1234567 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Stomach fullness
YEARLING CHINOOK SALMON 1981
50
40
30
40
30
20
10
COWLITZ
o
McKENZIE
-middotmiddot
OAKRIDGE- MARION FORKS Sant1am Stock n- bullbullll
McCALL
2111
nbullU
1234567 1234567 1234567 1234567
Stomach fullnen
WARM SPRINGS
IOAanl obulln
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
KEYTO
FULLNESS VALUES
-1m -2bullT_of_ SbullOuamtlull 4 bull Half fall 5 bull n qu lull ampbull fall 7bull0i -SlladlcflbullNetbullbullcmt
WIien CIIINlld UMhaclm bull Ea11111
__
Figure 46--Stomach fullness frequency curves for tag groups of yearling chinook salmon captured at Jones Beach March-June 1980 and 1981 Source and release site date of median fish recovery and number observed ate included
148
non-feeding individuals respectively One exception was Kooskia Hatchery fish released below Bonneville Dam which had 27 non-feeding fish During the same period in 1981 fish from Marion Forks (South Santiam stock) Rapid River and Round Butte Hatcheries had 3 0 and 10 non-feeding individuals respectively In 1981 two groups had a high percentage of non-feeding individuals Marion Forks (Carson stock) and Warm Springs Hatcheries--26 and 28 non-feeding respectively During this period in both years the high non-feeding rates could not be linked with environmental conditions (turbidity water temperature and water flow) biological or migrational characteristics (fish health stock differences distance of migration and release site)
From late May throu gh June 1980 after the eruption of Mount St Helens too few tagged yearling chinook salmon (12) were captured to evaluate dif ferences in food consumption [the migratory population normally decreases during that period (Dawley et al 1982)] In 1981 one group from McCall Hatchery was captured during late Mayearly June and it had 18 non-feeding individuals (Fig 46)
Coho Salmon--Coho salmon generally had the fullest stomachs of the three salmonid species It was unusual to observe greater than 10 non-feeding coho salmon within any population in 1980 or 1981 (Fig 47) There were no significant differences in the percentages of non-feeding fish among groups recovered in mid-May 1980 or 1981
Shortly after the eruption three groups of coho salmon from Willard Hatchery showed significantly greater percentages of non-feeding fish than earlier migrants Percentages of non-feeding fish were 95 21 and 17 respectively for releases made at Beaver Terminal (RKm 84) downstream from Bonneville Dam (RKm 230) and at the hatchery (RKm 268) The close proximity of Beaver Terminal to Jones Beach undoubtedly allowed insufficient time for the fish to begin feeding prior to capture (al 1 captured within 2 days) Excluding Beaver Terminal fish the non-feeding percentages for these groups in 1980 were about double that of any other group in 1980 or 1981 which suggested that food consumption by these coho salmon was ad versely affected by the eruption
food consumption by coho salmon returned to pre-eruption levels (Fig 42)
Steelhead--Steelhead had the lowest average ful lness values of the juvenile salmonids (Fig 42) Percentages of non-feeding fish within marked steelhead groups was almost always greater than 25 in 1980 and 1981 (Fig 48) Dworshak Hatchery fish that were barged to a release site downstream from Bonneville Dam in 1980 had significantly higher numbers of non-feeding fish (73) than controls which migrated from Dworshak Hatchery (34) We suspect that the short time between release at Bonneville Dam and recovery at Jones Beach (88 captured within 3 days) was insufficient for fish to develop aggressive feeding behavior in the river environment
No single group of steelhead was captured in large numbers following the eruption in 1980 but 59 of the 34 tagged fish observed were not feeding
149
COHO SALMON 1980
40
30
20
c 10
middot
0
i 40 i
i 30
20
10
CASCADE a- BoMn111 n- 11
WILLARD Boio Bonnndle l1 bull bull l2
TOUTLE
WILLARD
01 Jwt19 n bull 15
WASHOUGAL
17-bullbull 111
WASHOUGAL
15 11bull1n
SANDY
t02
WASHOUGAL
12 July bullbull90
3 4 5 6 7
WILLARD 1t S1 Terminlf n ftbull21
1234567
Stomach fullness
i
0 gt u
COHO SALMON 1981
50
40
30
20
10
50
40
30
20
10
SANDY
o bull 132
CASCADE
II Jun bullbull 06
WASHOUGAL
IJMay bullbull 10
CASCADE
10Jui- bullbulll2
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
CAScAOE EAGLE CREEK
a
WASHOUGAL
01 nbull70 nbull274
1234567 1234567
KEY TO FULLNESS VALUES
1 bull EmC1Y 1tomldl 2 bull T of food 3bull0ubulltet NU Hall lull
5 bull Th QU1 h111 6bull Fun 1 bull Disteflcitd ShedidbullNotHflnt
degMlfflctDtured U-SbullEbulltffi9
11Mnue1111nui
Stomach fullness
Figure 47--Stomach fullness frequency curves for tag groups of coho
salmon captured at Jones Beach March-June 1980 and 1981
Source and release site date of median fish recovery
and number observed are included
150
STEELHEAD 1980
40
DWORSHAK middot--middot-
05 bullbull 14
SKAMANIA a Wind Rifer 10Mly
I 40 bullbull0
ii 30
20
10
DWORSHAK
OS JO
WALLOWA
tOMo 1
DWORSHAIC
oa bullbull ZO
HAGERMAN It P1l11rneroi II-
bull 21
NIAGAR4 SPRINGS 11 PahlifflllrOI
SKAMANIA 11 1Click1tot Riow o o
nbull11 19
1234567 1234567
KEV TO FULLNESS VALUES
1 bull Em111Y 110fflach 2 bull Taca cf food 3bull Ou1nufuU 4 bull Half lutl 5 bull ThrN qu1r11n htll 6bull Full 7 bull Di1nftdtd hdsd bull Not IIDftl
Mien czcaturMI Undlaaed bull Ealbullnt
lfflfflc11nursd
2345671234567 1234567
Stomach fulln11ss
STEELHEAD 1981
OWORSHAK TUCANNON NIAGARA SPRING$ WALLCMA PATTERSON SLOUGH
13- 18MOY 18- iMw 18IUM
c i111 bull 110 bullbull22 ftbull 13 IIbull 1Z
0 50 1831
0
40
30
20 0
10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1234567
Stomach fullness
Figure 48--Stomach fullness frequency curves for tag groups of steelhead captured at Jones Beach March-June 1980 and 1981 Source and release site date of median fish recovery and number observed are included
151
Diet of Subyearling Chinook Salmon and Effects of the Eruption of Mount St Helens
This portion of the report documents the diet of subyearling chinook salmon at the upstream extremity of the estuary (RKm 75) from 1979 through 1982 and discusses the impact of the eruption of Mount St Helens on that diet
The stomach contents from 492 subyearling chinook salmon collected from March through June of 1979-1982 and 74 collected from July through September 1980 were examined Data from each year were grouped into 14-day intervals The 14-day intervals were selected to separate pre-eruption from post-eruption (excessive turbidity) sampling periods at Jones Beach Comparisons between years were limited to the March-June period
During March-June 1979-1982 Insecta and Crustacea comprised the major food items found in subyearling chinook salmon--54 and 41 IRI respectively (Table 38) The most important order of insects was Diptera 16 IRI however unidentifiable Insecta represented 35 IRI The most important crustaceans were Amphipoda and Cladocera which represented 19 and 13 IRI respectively Mysidacea were important only in 1982 (32 IRI) In July 1980 insects were the most important source of food (62 IRI 1 ) but during August and September of that year Cladocera became the most important constituent of the diet about 94 IRI (Table 39)
Insecta--Insecta were of major importance in the diet March-June in all years particularly in 1981 (85 IRI Table 38) when the availability of amphipods appeared to be limited
The types of insects found in the stomachs showed no apparent differences between years consequently the data for all years were combined by 14-day periods (Table 40) Diptera were the most numerous insects identifiable to order--808 There was no seasonal pattern of Diptera consumption for the various metamorphic stages frequencies of larvae pupae and adults were similar Homoptera and Hymenoptera (mostly adults) were the next most numerous insects--47 and 37 of the total insects respectivel y Insects representing 10 additional orders were identified however each represented less than 3 of the total insect count
Crustacea --The consumption of amp hi pods varied from year to year In 1979 peak consumption of amphipods occurred in late March-early April (71 IRI) and in June (85 IRI) (Fig 49) In 1980 an early April peak at 39 IRI was apparent however the June peak observed in 1979 was not repeated in 1980 after the eruption when the IRI 1 was only 6 In 1981 minimal amphipod consumption was observed averaging 3 IRI March-June In 1982 amphipods again increased in importance with peaks in early April (33 IRI) and in June (20 IRI) Meyer et al (1981) observed a similar bimodal peak of amphipod consumption by juvenile chinook salmon in the lower Duwamish River Washington
152
Table 38--Percent modified index of relative importance (IRI)if of diet items identified in stomach contents from subyearling chinook salmon captured at Jones Beach Oregon (RKm 75) March-June 1979-1982
Diet item 1979 1980 1981 1982 Average
Insecta
Unidentifiable 38 33 54 14 35
Diptera 6 12 27 18 16
Misc Insecta 2 3 4 5 3
Total 46 48 85 37 54
Crustacea
Amphipoda 40 16 2 17 19
Cladocera 8 25 8 9 12
Mysidacea 2 1 1 32 9
Misc Crustacea 0 2 1 0 1
Total 50 44 12 58 41
Miscellaneous total 4 8 3 5 5
a RI = weight x frequency of occurrence
153
Table 39--Percent modified index of relative importance (IRI)f of food items identified in stomach contents from subyearling chinook salmon captured at Jones Beach (RKm 75) 1 July to 8 September 1980
1 Jul 15 Jul 29 Jul 12 Aug 25 Aug to to to to to
Diet 14 Jul 28 Jul 11 Aug 25 Aug 8 Sep
Total Insecta 57 68 9 2 0
Diptera 24 24 5 o8 0
Total Crustacea 41 32 91 98 100
Cladocera 35 18 87 96 99
Miscellaneous prey 2 0 0 0 0
y IRI =weight x frequency of occurrence
154
Table 40--Insect orders and percent of total insects observed in stomach contents from subyearling chinook salmon during 14-day intervals 25 March to 30 June 1979-1982
Date interval 25 Mar 8 Apr 22 Apr 6 May 20 May
to to to to to Insect order 7 Apr 21 Apr 5 May 19 May 2 Jun
Percentsf
Collembola 41 48 l 5 03 12
Ephemeroptera 78 26 48 23 10
Odonata oo oo oo oo 0 1
Plecoptera oo oo 05 oo oo
Psocoptera oo oo 02 oo oo
Thysan optera oo oo 01 oo 02
Hemiptera 38 1 l 03 oo 0 1
Homo pt era oo 06 154 23 4 1
Coleoptera 40 22 32 24 32
Trichoptera 14 05 05 04 oo
Lepidoptera 13 oo 02 02 oo
Diptera 754 835 698 913 817
Hymenoptera 26 42 32 13 8 1
Total no insects 77 180 589 604 836
Total no stomachs 44 58 102 78 71
E Percent of total number of insects identified
155
3 Jun to
16 Jun
09
13
oo
09
36
oo
oo
70
34
oo
04
790
3 9
240
65
17 Jun to
30 Jun
1 1
oo
oo
oo
8 1
0 1
0 1
32
05
02
02
848
23
918
74
Average of
intervals
20
28
oo
02
17
01
08
47
27
04
03
808
37
3444
492
1979
1980
n bull 181 not 1251 1291 1181 1141 1181 1251
1981 ---July 100
l
rr RO
60
middotmiddotmiddot--Follbull
40 Pla11
rdf i o
-
Mvctd
7tti M1tetllftfOU CfulilCtI
Cladmea n bull 151 171 1381 1181 1201 1201 1211
1982
Amohpoda
100
1161 1201 1201 I2D1 1201 1201
I--- Anrl -------Mav------June----1
Figure 49--Modified index of relative importance (IRI) for food items consumed by subyearling chinook salmon collected at Jones Beach Oregon 1979-1982
156
121
Three species of Amphipoda were found in the stomachs Corophium salmonis C spinicorne and Eogammarus confervicolus Diet composition after the eruption (Table 41) indicated that the population of C salmonis was more severely reduced than that of the other two species Before the eruption
poundmiddot salmonis comprised 74 of all amphipods identifiable to speci es compared to 38 after the eruption A substantial reduction of C salmonis in the diet of juvenile salmonids following the eruption was also-observed in the lower Columbia River estuary by McCabe et al (1981) and Emmett (1982) The greater reduction of C salmonis could be a function of different substrate requirements (Hazel and Kelley 1966 Chang and Levings 1976 Brzezinski and Holton 1981 Turk et al 1980 Turk and Risk 1981 Meyer et al 1981 Albright 1982 Wilson 1983) middot Brzezinski andmiddot Holton (1981) found that amphipod abundance (primarily C salmonis) was decreased after the eruption in areas of
the estuary that had a benthic layer of ash
In the Columbia River estuary C salmonis exh ibit a bivoltine life cycle (Davis 1978 Wilson 1983) The previous fall generation produces a spring brood in May which matures throughout the summer and subsequently produces a fall brood It appears that the 1980 spring brood upstream from Jones Beach was disrupted by the heavy deposition of sediment from the eruption Substrate characteristics created upstream from Jones Beach appear to have inhibited the recovery of the amphipod population in 1981 as well as indicated by their low percent IRI in the diet of subyearling chinook salmon
In rtarch-June Cladocera were of major importance in the diet only during 1980 averaging 25 IRI (Table 38) Coincident with the decrease of amphipods (Fig 49) the consumption of cladocerans increased sharply following the eruption In other years consumption of cladocerans in March-June was greater than 10 IRI during only one 14-day interval each year 56 22 April-5 May 1979 51 17-30 June 1981 and 58 3-16 June 1982 In August and September 1980 cladocerans were the major item in the diet (Table 38) Craddock et al (1976) observed that cladocerans were an important portion of the diet for chinook salmon captured during August-October in the Columbia River at RKm 118
Mys ids (Neomysis mercedis) were rare except in 1982 when they were the dominant food from mid-April to mid-May
Fl uc tua tions in the abundance of cladocerans and mys ids in the diet was apparently unrelated to effects from the eruption (Fig 49) Cladoceran populations are known to exhibit extreme variability in their seasonal and annual abundance (Ward and Whipple 1918 Pennak 1978) N mercedis abundance and distribution has been associated with a number of environmental factors including salinity temperature dissolved oxygen light and river flow (Hopkins 1958 Heubach 1969 Orsi and Knutson 1979 Siegfried et al 1979 1980) However extreme variations in population abundance from one year to the next unrelated to environmental changes have been reported ( Hopkins 1958 Turner and Heubach 1966 Heubach 1969) It is possible that increased mysid availability in 1982 masked the true extent of amphipod recovery
157
Table 41--Amphipod species and percent of total amphipods observed in stomach contents from subyearling chinook salmon before and after the eruption of Mount St Helens--March-June 1979-1982
Before eruptio
After eruptionW
Species () ()
Corophium salmonis 74 38
Corophium spinicorne 22 45
Eogammarus conf ervicolus 4 17
25 March 1979 to 19 May 1980 E
b 20 May 1980 to 30 June 1982 (excluding da ta from July to September 1980)
158
Miscellaneous Prey--Fish larvae (Osmeridae) were of minor dietary importance in late March and early April 1979 and 1980 6 and 15 IRI respectively none were present in 1981 or 1982
Immediately following the eruption (20 May-2 June 1980) consumption of plant material increased from 0 to 12 IRI Relatively high consumption of plant material also occurred from 25 March to 8 April in 1980 and 1981 9 and 17 respectively and from 6 to 19 May 1982 10
Geographical Differences--From March through June during years prior to the eruption subyearling chinook salmon captured at Jones Beach consumed similar proportions of insects and amphipods whereas upstream from Jones Beach in the reservoir7 of McNary Dam (RKm 470-521) fish consumed insects andcladocerans (Fairlyl ) and further upstream in the free flowing Hanford reach (RKm 591-629) fish consumed primarily insects (Becker 1973) Fish captured downstream from Jones Beach (RKm 4-40) consumed primarily amphipods (Durkin et al 1977 1981)
Feeding Charactedstics of Juveniles Entering the Estuary
This portion of the report focuses on the examination of feeding rate differences between stocks species interaction dietary overlap and comparisons to other geographical areas Proximate analysis of stomach content s are also presented
Stomach Fullness Comparisons--Differences in mean fullness for groups captured in 1982 and 1983 (Fig 50) were evaluated statistically and some differences were related to biological or release characteristics Researchers familiar with groups exhibiting increased or decreased rates of food consumption may be able to make additional correlations
1 Subyearling chinook salmon Subyearling chinook salmon were capturedin all months of the year and tagged fish showed great variability in mean fullness (Figs 51-53) In 1982 and 1983 during peak migration (May and June) the majority of fish captured had higher fullness values than fish captured in 1980 and 1981 (Fig 42)
Temporal trends in variation of stomach fullness between years (1980-83) are not apparent but fish from three different culture stations and wild fish exhibited variations that were apparently related to rearing environment release site or pre-release disease incidence
A higher feeding rate was observed for fish from Stayton Pond which may be a result of the earthen pond environment In 1982 the mean fullness value
15 R Fairly US Fish and Wildlife Service National Fishery ResearchCenter Willard Substation Star Rt Cook WA 98605 pers commun
159
OREGON
LEGEl1D
lM Site ft To Sjte
LOVER ClllUIIBI R l TRIBS IITLlHETTE R l TRI BS
1 Jones Beach 75 23 Eagle Creel Hal 9 247 2 Abernathy SC0C 9 91 24 Stayton fmd ij 412 J Lr KdoH Hot bl 127 25 ftinto 4 Kalua folls Hot bl 141 lfor Narion Fks Hotgt d 452 5 Lewis River Hot 163 26 Dex hr liar Oak ridge Hal iJ 491 6 Speelyai 196 27 lkKenzie Hot g m 7 Ca11lih Hlt V 189 8 SkC110nio Hot v 213 DESCIIUTES R I TRIBS 9 llashougal Hot IJ 221
10 Bonnevi lie 001 230 28 llorbull Springs Hot 485 11 flonneville Hat I 231 29 Ro1md Bulle Hat 506 12 Oxbow Hot g 231 13 Cascadf Hal 41 232 14 Sodr Hot gj 235 15 Lit llht Sal Hot 4 261
16 Willard Hat 4 268 17 Spring Creek Kol q 269 18 Klick i lat Hot ly JiB 19 lllotillo River 472 20 Vellli tQ Bridge 621 21 Priest Rapids Doa 639 22 leoYe11110tlh Hoi j 789
a llnited Scitn Fish and Uildlire SeNice bl IQ5hingtan Depcttlnnl of Fisheries c lloshington Deportunt of Goal d Oregon DamppQrttent of Fish Qlld Uildlife ti Id4ho Deporhent of Fish d Gci1t
1 Si ft
SHAKE R l TRIBS
30 Lyons Ferry Hot 9 600 31 Lcwer Granite Dai
(for Hogeran Hat) ti 693
CLEAAIIATER R l TRIBS
32 Dworshal Hat B09 33 Kooslia Hot 9 868
SMHOH RtJER l TRIBS
34 Rapid River Hot 967 35 5 fork So lion R (tor
He Coll Hatgt el 1153 36 Pohsiaeroi R ltfor HiagorG
Spring Hat) t 1311 31 Scilllooth Hoty 14amp6
Figure 50--Columbia River basin showing locations of release sites hatcheries and Jones Beach
160
1980
SUBY EARLING CHINOOK SALMON Erupion
J
4
6
2
7
-
Slended
u
ll
Cy-------- trltmiddotmiddotmiddot middot --------------------middot middot middotmiddot _ = ________middotmiddotmiddot
YEARLING CHINOOK SALMON J 7
istended lull
)(ltmiddotgtmiddotbull
1L__----L-------__ ____________ __
STEELHEAD i Oitlended full
Halllull----------41
-----obull ---
1
-----------
1 Emp1bull---r---------------1l2----------
17----
12 12 L-March----April-------May--------June----
YEARLING CHINOOK SALMON
i
i
Dinendedf
fS
u l
=middotmiddotmiddotmiddotbull
middot
A A 4 Hall full middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot
middot bull middotmiddotmiddotmiddotmiddotbull middotbullmiddot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot lt
3 fr middotmiddot middot
2 bullmiddotbull-
1 Empty-J_ _ _1 _____ ------------------_-----
ll COHO SALMON
n
Oittcndedlull---
-
t-
gt
- -- --bull
-
-
A bull
- 1 - --
4 Hallfull---------fmiddotI
Cmiddot -middot7deg__
----
_--
--
-3 2
1 Empfy---------------------------------------7
STEELHEAD
i
Oistended full------------------------
____ __ ___ 9_-----i7-hc-----i Half full
1 Empfy-T---J-------
12------------
107---
12 12 LMarch1---April---- ---May----bull----June
Figure 51--Ninety-five percent confidence intervals of mean stomach fullness for salmonids captured at Jones Beach plotted by 3-day intervals March-June 1980 and 1981
ii deg i N
1982
SUBYEARLING CHINOOK SALMON
- _ 2
-
tobullbull
I Emply ___ ________ _ ________ ___ _
YEARLING CHINOOK SALMON
-
I
COHO SALMON
to
HbullII lull-----------=== 1centtt-
--
2 1 IEmpty------------_---------------
STEELHEAO
4 Hallfull---------------0------r-bull-_ __
t
Dnndodlull
1 tmply-------------L----------------
12 12 17 -----April ___ _----Mav---lL----June---
1983
SUBY EARLING CHINOOK SALMON
[
0 11
H1lllu11----zvrv--f--_L
2
l IEmpty _____ _ _______ _ _______ __ __ -J
YEARLING CHINOOK SALMON
COHO SALMON f 0 bullbull
Hlllull---------- ___r-_C--- =-----
2 1 Emply-----L-------------------------1
STEELHEAO
tObullmnddlull
HUfull-----------=-----------------
1 Emi1v- ____ _ ___ r--___ _ ___ T ___ __ ___ _ 15 15 14
---8A11___JL---111y---8L--Jiune---
Figure 52--Ninety-five percent confidence intervals of mean stomach fullness for juvenile salmonids captured in beach and purse seines at Jones Beach plotted by 3-day intervals March-June 1982 and 1983
-
deg w
SUBVEARLING CHINOOK SALMON July bull Oecemile-t
1980
111tuu-----------------f-v-l
T--- ---r--=----J--------------r---_ ___ _
1981
6
_
_
__________ __llbulllrlull-------------------------
1 [mplr ------r-------------------------------
1982
-===
2
fo 1 Empey--------L--------_ __ _ ___ __ ___ __ __ ___ _
1983
lI
16 15 15 14 ---July --------Augull----L-S11i1m1 --------- Oc1ol-1-- 1--tbullo-1J-bull1 ___JI
Figure 53 --Ninety-five percent confidence intervals of mean stomach fullness for subyearling chinook salmon captured in beach and purse seines at Jones Beach plotted by 3-day intervals July-December 1980-1983
for the Stayton Pond fish (50 early migrants) was significantly higher than that for fish from Spring Creek Hatchery (40) Fig 54 In 1983 the mean fullness value for the Stayton Pond fish (48) was significantly higher than Bonneville Hatchery diet study fish (38) and higher (not significant) than Little White Salmon Hatchery fish (44) (Fig 55) In 1980 and 1981 higher than average feeding rates were also observed from Stayton Pond fish Estuarine recovery percentages for Stayton Pond fish (1980-1983) showed no difference from other groqps but adult return rates appear substantially greater than average (Day)
As mentioned previously fish from the Abernathy Salmon C ulture Development Center (SCDC) have a low feeding rate when captured at Jones Beach We believe that the lower feeding rate for these fish is associated with the short time period between relese and recapture at Jones Beach release site is 16 km from Jones BeachJ In May 1982 fish from Abernathy SCDC had significantly lower mean fullness value than fish from Spring Creek Hatchery and two groups from Bonneville Hatchery (29 versus 40 37 and 38 respectively)
During November and December 1982 one of four tag groups released from Bonneville Hatchery had a significantly lower mean fullness value (Fig 55) which probably resulted from factors affecting the fish during hatchery rearing The lower river stock (tule) reared in well water (mean fullness
middot 2 6) had a high pre-release mortality and were in poor heal th at release( Hanse) whereas tule stock reared in Tanner Creek water upriver latefall stock (bright) reared in Tanner Creek water and bright stock reared inwell water were unaffected by disease (mean fullness 31 31 and 33respectively)
In 1983 over 200 tagged wild fish from the Lewis River (seined tagged and released same day) were captured and their stomach fullness observed at Jones Beach (Fig 55) The dates of median fish recovery for the two tag groups were outside of the 7-day range used for comparing mean fullness values wi th other groups however the wild fish ap peared to feed at a similar rate as most cultured fish captured during the same months An exception however was a comparison with fish reared at the Cowlitz Hatchery where changes
16 W Day Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife 17330 SE Evelyn St Clackamas OR pers commun 17 In 1980 and 1981 fish from Abernathy Hatchery had 51 and 44 non-feeding fish compared to 24 in 1982 Non-feeding rates among these 3 years are significantly different (P lt 001) but mean fullness values were not significantly different (range 290 to 310 P lt 005) Diseases incurred during culture also may have increased the proportion of non-feeding fish observed in 1980 and 1981 (L Fowler US Fish and Wildlife Service Abernathy Salmon Cultural Development Center 1440 Abernathy Road Longview WA 98632 pers commun Hmiddot Hansen Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife 17330 S E Evelyn St Clackamas OR pers commun
164
SUBYEARLING CHINOOK SALMON 1982
40
30
20
SPRING CREEK Mardi tlaOtd LbullBOO t bulllt
STAYTON POriD E1tlyffl9Mh a lbull12 ft
40 1-U
3D
20
to
II
SPRING CREEK o Lbullaso r39
SPRING CREEK Mvntu11 2bull- bullISI bull bullSamp bullbull o
LITILE WHITE SALMON Contr1bu1eon
KLICKITAT -shy
3 II
UJulII lbull182 n bull Ill
4JO
30 -
0 20 gt 10
LOWER KALAMA
PNNluclion Lbull JOI 111bull110
4D _
30
20
10
10
BONNEVILLE Now-Tule lbullIISO fil bull 109 I bull21
1111
1bull1120 n bull 119 f bullbull-2
PRIEST RAPIDS __
21-
1 ftbull 123 r-u
BONNEVILLE NobtTule IINoftnmt t bull 1480 tt bull 101 fbull3I
1234567 1234567
SPRING CREEK ADtcl 21Aor-l tbull814 nbullGI FbullH
ABE ANA TIIY ConlribullOft 1a lbulllll ftbulll10
r-u
BONNEVILLE Bighnl19lbl t5JuN lbull811 ftbull 168 bull
KALAMA FALLS ---
09-lbullHO nbull 135 bull42
BONNEVILLE Notlfflbetbdegn IONQWffflDlf [41 180 r
S1omach fullness
BONNEVILLE ADal o_ l bull120 r-n
BONNEVILLE Tul4180lbl 91-L 1t8I 4 ftbull 141
STAYTON 10111D LateffllttIIIII imiddot
fbullbull2
WASHOUGAL PfOdllCCtan a
i bull JII wbullJn i bullbull2
BONNEVILLE Ndeglfflbtflbri9hb ti NOyenMlblt t bull 1410 bullbullIOI r-a
1491
1234567
SPRING CREEK atUma1UR1Mt
BONNEVILLI atUn11ull1A-1011n middot-
tbull8S2 11ii
[bull885 i bull10
BONNEVILLE Tur 15111I
BONNEVILLE Ditt11Udy
t-o bullbullbullbulllbullU
OXBOW
o lbullBOO nbull 111
Hatchary nllullioa
HAGERMAN fhl1111111n 2
[2Jo bullbull re fbullJI
Lbull 1285 ftbull 171 bull bull 31
COWLITZ ---
10 1bullao bullbull5amp4
BONNEVILLE Autuibullshy
3-
bull
Lbull UM5 fbull42
12345671234567
KEV TO FULLNESS VALUES
1 bull lfflDIVIIOmlm
2 bull Trace ol fOOcl 3 bull eu11 fuU bullbullHalf full 5 bull -- full ampbullFu ll 1 bull 011tnCSCd ShlOtd bull flot 11111119
Wftffl CampDhHfO U11U11GqbullE11tft1J
bullllt11uo1ua
Figure 54--Stomach fullness frequency curves for tag groups of subyearling chinook salmon captured at Jones Beach during 1982 Source study descriptor date of median fish recovery mean length (mm) number observed and mean fullness value are included
165
f
u
0 gt u
u
SUBYEARLING CHINOOK SALMON 1983
40
SPRING CREEK Diet study 04 May i bull 909 bullbull 206 Ibull 42
PRIEST RAPIDS Poduction
19Junt ibull96S n bull 139
40 ibullJB
30
20
10
40
30
20
10
COWLITZ Produclion 08 July l bull RB 3 n middot 490 39
WASHOUGAL August 1elt1se 10 Siri11rmt-ot L bull 107 0 n bull 11
40 i bull9
30
20
10
BONNEVILLE DiH 11udy 10Mav i bull 835 n bull 133 ibull38
BONNEVILLE Transport control
f2J2
nbull 107 i bull 43
PRIEST RAPIDS Wild 1tock a July L bull 1173 n bull 86 ibull40
WASHOUGAL October rele1se 770IDlMt i bull 119 1 bull bull 63 1bull46
STAYTON PONO Con1ribution ampM L bull 846 bull bull 82 49
BONNEVILLE 1t Vernita Bridge
r3 abullbull11 Ibull 36
LEWIS RIVER Wild stock
5 July L bull 79 9 n bull 112 T-45
WASHOUGAL November releast 09NUWtlftbrt i 1223 n 69 i bull 32
155)
I 2345 67 123 4567 1234567
Stomach fullness
LITTLE WHITE SALMON Subye1rling spings
ROUND BUTTE Subyearling Springs o Jun 21 Moy
i bull 891 n bullbullo i bull
HAGERMAN Subyearling springs 06July l bull 133D n bull27 r 31
LEWIS RIVER Wild stock 08 Auqu11 i bull 912 bull middot 130 i-43
[ bull 1359 n bull 45 r 3bull
LITTLE WHITE SALMON Subyearling springs 06Julv ibullll10 n 42 f bull 44
BONNEVILLE August release 22 Aucaust L bull IOS5 39 Ibull C8
KEY TO
FULLNESS VALUES
1 bull Emo1y stomach 2 bull Trace of foad 3 bull Ouar1er tun 4bull Halflull
S bull Thrtt Qu1rlfrs full 6bull Full 7 bull Duunded Shaad bull Not utrng
whe-n cip111rd Unsnaae-o bull En1n9
whn ciDturrd
Figure 55--Stomach fullness frequency curves for tag groups of subyearling chinook salmon captured at Jones Beach 1983 Source study descriptor date of median fish recovery mean length (mm) number observed and mean stomach fullness value are included
166
within the time period of migration in condition factor amounts of visible body fat and fullness value indicated that the wild fish were better utilizing the available food resources
Other fish groups showed significant differences in mean fullness values In 1982 Bonneville Hatchery diet study fish ( tule stock) had a significantly higher mean fullness value (42) than that for two tule stock production release groups (37 and 38 Fig 54) In 1983 Bonneville Hatchery diet study fish had a signif icantly lower mean fullness value (38) than Spring Creek Hatchery diet study fish (42) and the Stayton Pond fish ( Fig 55) In 1982 Hagerman Hatchery fish had a significantly lower mean fullness (37) than fish from Lower Kalama Hatchery (41) In early July 1983 fish groups from Hagerman Bonneville ( transport and control groups) Cowlitz and Little White Salmon Hatcheries had significant differences among mean stomach fullness values (range 3 1 to 44 Table 42) Differences of race and size affect this comparison ie the fish from Hagerman and Little White Salmon Hatcheries were spring chinook salmon and the others were fall chinook salmon mean fork lengths at recovery ranged from 88 to 133 mm
2 Yearling chi nook salmon Fish captured from March through Aprilgenerally had low fullness values (Figs 51 and 52) To interpret the feeding behavior duri ng January to early May we divided the 1980 to 1983 fullness data into two groups fish released from hatcheries in the fall that overwintered in the river system (residual) and those released during March (Fig 56) Residual fish fed consistently throughout recovery and mean fullness values (3-day averages) showed insignificant (Plt010) correlation to recovery dates (correlation coefficient r = 037) The overall mean fullness value for residual fish was 42 (n = 149 date of median fish recovery =
2 April) Fish released in the spring did not feed consistently throughout the recovery period and showed significant (Plt0001) positive correlation between mean fullness values (3-day averages) and dates of recovery (r = 093 non-linear power curve regression) Spring released fish had predominantly empty or trace full stomachs during March with gradually increasing mean fullness thereafter overall mean fullness was 28 (n = 376 date of median fish recovery = 1 April) bull High proportions of non-feeding yearling chinook salmon were recovered from releases in March 1982 at Oxbow Hatchery (41) and Bonneville Hatchery in 1982 and 1983 (61 and 66 respectively) Figure 57 12f The proportion of non-feeding fish was highest for initial catches and decreased with time after release
19 In 1983 a second mark group released from Bonneville Hatchery on 23March had 31 non-feeding fish although only 13 were examined and there was no significant difference from the earlier group The two Bonneville releases were different stocks (tule and bright respectively) In 1982 these two stocks were released on the same date (17 March) and had similar numbers of non-feeding fish (tule = 58 bright= 64) Time of release in the spring may affect feeding rate for yearling chinook salmon
167
Table 42--Comparison of mean stomach fullness for different marked groups of subyearling chinook salmon captured at Jones Beach in early July 1983
_g Dlte
Mean length 12_
Number s1mp led
Mean fullness fl
Significmce
________________________ Source__DescriRtor __________________________ _
Hagerman Bonneville subyeorling Vernita Br
spring chinoollt fall chinook
6 July
133
27
3l
5 July
114
47
Little White Sl Cowlitz Bonneville subyearling
foll chinook fall chinook spring chinook
El July
88
490
39
2 July
91
107
6 JbullJly
111
42
tltlte of median fish recovery for individulls with fullness observbullltions b Mean fork bmgth (mm) for intire t1g gtoup 7 day aver1ge about the cl1te
of median fish recovery c Underlined fullness 111ems h1ve no significant difference ltPgt005)
C
-
u IIgt
E
IIgt Q)
D March released fish n = 376)
bull Fall released fish residuals)
7 Distended n = 149)
6 Full bull bull bull D
bull bullbull
5 bull bull
bull bull a bull bull D bull
bull bull
4 Half full bull o bull bull oD bull
bull
bull D
3 bull D a bull bullbull
bull bull bull D
D D
2 o0aa
a
D 1 Empty = I
14 16 15
Januarv--+-1__ Februarv--+-1-+--- March-------+ April JMay
Figure 56--Mean stomach fullness for yearling chinook salmon (residualand March released fish) captured at Jones Beach 1980-1983 plotted by 3-day intervals
169
YEARLING CHINOOK SALMON 1982 BONNEVILLE Stock tvllu1t1an 31 ac11 t 1
fc 40
MARION FORKS Sn1tam1toclt 21ADul t
C A 51
40 f-41
30
I 20
O 10 i t LEAVENWORTH
Contribution UMIv t bull 1410 bull 13
40 lbulla 1921
30
20
10
OXBOW
RAPID RIVER Vibtio111ccN tbull 1111 bullbull JO r o
l bull liiS 11 34
OAKRIOGE $1H9lding D9Ar-d 1 bull J2SO abull 15 tbullu
MARION FORKS Canon stock JSU L bull lt)a Ibull 39
S1omach fullness
COIVLITZ Erylhf0fflyc1n 11udy lampAput bull 1508 bullbull 40 r-u
ROUNOBUTTE H11chtty llalUatampOft 16 l Illti bullbull 2S t -ie
OEXTERPOND Sie lldtttt 2S Anul t wu TH
KOOSKIA RbullIHllSlff _[ bull 1SSamp Q bull 2G I 35
KEV TO FULLNESS VALUES
1 bull EmDtY IIOffllCII 2 bull T11C1 ot lood 3bull Omstt1 luH bullbull tt11ttull s bull CVlffflI tun ampbullFoti J bull Ottaltd Sh1ote1 bull Not HC1n9
wfttftCIDhHtd Unltllotel bull pound1119
IICIDtuld
1234567123456
YEARLING CHINOOK SALMON 1983 MeKENZIE Rttich11t1 11 _ t 1188 bull N
40 3
1
30
20
i 10
s
ROUND BUTTE H H1tch1y ev1hl11aon
0 [tr 11bullU
f 40 ibulllJ
2 3 4
BONNEVILLE 08 Match ttfHM 11Mrill t un
I 11 1amp11
BONNEVILLE 11 Um11llli1 Rbuller
BONNEVILLE 23 Mrch 1-tta1t
LEAVENWORTH 11 Y i1kiim1 Ribullebull l -L bull 1bull11 11 bull 109 l-11
Stomach fullness
McKENZIE $pnngrtltaw
SAWTOOTH Hucbfy -i1lu11ion 23-lbull 111D ftbullU 121
COWLITZ Brood 1toclc IS- i 179
i lt 1451
McCALL Httchery 1wllulll0ft 1bullun Lbull 1bullamp4 n bull 31 F bullJI
Figure 57--Stomach fullness frequency curves for taggroups of yearling chinook salmon capturedat Jones Beach 1982 and 1983 Source studydescriptor date of median fish recovery meanlength (mm) number observed and mean stomachfullness value are included
170
Fish captured in May and June generally elicited higher mean fullness values than those collected in March and early April b ut each year there was a decrease in mean fullness during May (r = -082 -069 -066 and -052 respectively for 1980 198 1 1982 and 1983) (Figs 51 and 52) This decreasing fullness trend seemed to occur within mark groups as well as for the aggregate of all individuals For example Warm Springs Hatchery chinook salmon showed high food consumption in early May with progressively lower fullness through the month (Fig 58)
Some fish groups passing Jones Beach in May and June showed significantly lower feeding rates than others passing during the same period (Fig 57) In 1982 the mean fullness of fish from Round middotButte Hatchery was significantly lower than that for fish from Marion Forks and Rapid River Hatcheries ( 2 8 versus 3 9 and 4 0 respectively) Mean fullness for Leavenworth Hatchery fish was significantly lower than for McCall Hatchery fish (29 versus 34) In 1983 mean fullness values of fish from Bonneville and Cowlitz Hatcheries were significantly lower than means for fish from McKenzie Hatchery (25 and 20 versus 35 respectively)
3 Coho salmon Fullness values for coho salmon were lowest in 1983 (mean = 38) and highest in 1980 (mean = 41) (Figs 51 and 52) In 1980 and 1981 proportions of non-feeding coho salmon did not exceed 10 excep t for fish from Willard Hatchery released shortly after the eruption of Mount St Helens
In 1982 all groups of coho salmon had less than 5 non-feeding fish but some groups captured during the same date range had significantly different f ullness means (Fig 59) Fullness mean for fish from Lower Kalama Hatchery was significantly lower than that for Cowlitz Hatchery fish and both were significantly lower than the mean for Sandy Hatchery fish (33 36 and 40 respectively) Fullness means for fish from Eagle Creek and Washougal Hatcheries were significantly lower than the mean for Cascade Hatchery fish (39 41 and 44 respectively)
In 1983 all groups of coho salmon had less than 10 non-feeding fish except those from Lower Kalama and Cowl itz Hatcheries ( 14 and 15 respectively) Figure 59 Al though sample size was small (n = 29) the mean fullness value for fish from Lower Kalama Hatchery (37) was not significantly different than fish from Washougal (39) or Sandy Hatcheries (41) it was significantly lower than Bonneville Hatchery fish (47) Cowlitz Hatchery fish had a significantly lower mean fullness than fish from either Sandy or Eagle Creek Hatcheries (34 versus 41 and 38 respectively)
4 Steelhead Fullness values were lowest in 1983 (mean = 26) and highest in 1982 (mean = 30 Figs 51 and 52) In 1982 mark groups captured during similar time periods showed no significant differences between fullness means (range 27-31 Fig 60) In 1983 Hagerman Hatchery B stock had a significantly lower fullness mean than fish from Lyons Ferry and Dworshak Hatcheries 2 1 versus 2 6 and 2 6) but 11 days later mean fullness for Hagerman A stock steelhead was not significantly different than that of a second group of Dworshak Hatchery fish (23 and 26 respectively) In 1982 Hagerman stock A and B steelhead were cap tured during similar date periods both had fullness means of 31
171
7
6
5
2
II) 4
II) 3
2
WARM SPRINGS HATCHERY Tag 050823
(5) (131
bull bull
(101
bull
(1)
bull
27
April
(6)
bull
(71 (2)
bull bull
111)
bull (4) (41
bull bull
I 1 I
15
May June
Figure 58--Mean stomach fullness (3-day intervals) for yearling chinook salmon released at Warm Springs Hatchery and captured at Jones Beach 1981 Sample number in parenthesis
172
COHO SALMON 1982
uw1SAIVtR May1bulltRbull11 v (bull llU
Tbullu so
40
JO
middotamp
f EAGLE CREEK
e 0nuty study _ 0 tbullUJ1
0 210 39 1 50
40
30
COHO SALMON 1983
WASHOUGAL Ooanmaent
t bullbull l1
40 39
EAGLE CREEK
Den111ynudr
i _ lbull 151 J i-1a
40
30
20
0
SPIELYAI oce m1--n L bull IJlil r
40
30
20
10
1 2 3 bull 6 1
$ANOY
o w tbulllllJ Clbull 211 Tbullbullo
WASHOUGAL 0111111 1tuc1 iraquobull-Lbull 13a0 155 Tbullbullt
LOfEll lCALAMA DffltHy scudw 1 IMbull
t bullbullbull f bull l 7
CASCAOE 0cM ffl flnNn1 10 L bull 1401
r J
LOWE A KALAMA Otn11ty PYClr i
tbull bullbull - -r-u
UWISRIVER lun11e111 _ l bull 141 bullbulln i-o
801111-fEVllllE Prochcton HNIH
i bull 14JI
1
WASKOUCiAL o nd in-L bull bullJbullt h fbull JI
234567
Storriacti fullness
CCMLITZ o lludr
tbull IJSJ JI
SADV
01H IIUdf middotbull t bull Hibull 111 f I I
BdegNlVILLI PtlNMChOft
CASCADE RelHttlire
Lbull IJC9
COWLITZ Omsv ttudr 12 L bull OD ibullJl1 J
WllLAAO o-w
KpoundYTD
IULLNUS VALUES
1 bull poundnply 1ombullcb 2 bull Tr1c ot tood 3 bull Q1111 ull bullbullHalt lull 5 bull llHH quAHfU full 6 bull full 1 bull Dnnde4 Sh1d1d bull Pler tllltn-i
bullnn tlDIIHed Uri1aijd bull faun
hn (fDlwJitd
Figure 59--Stomach fullness frequency curves forcoho salmon captured at Jones Beach1982 and 1983 Source study descriptordate of median fish recovery mean length(mm) number observed and mean fullnessvalue are included
173
u u
0
C
IL
STEELHEAD 1982 DWORSHAK OWORSHAK NIAGARA SPRINGS at Sk11ma11ia Con1ribul11111 Vibtio vaccin1
f1i
raquo Mly l bull 2004
27 Mly tbull2lt182
n bull 11 78 n bull48 r- 30 r- 3o Tbull 29
50 1541
40
30
STEELHEAD 1983 OWORSHAK LYONS FERRY HAGERMAN Homing Boocl stock Stock B 11lav 26 Moy ]OMov ibull2015 1 bull 2217 L bull 2490 n bull 17 5i3 n bull s
r-29 r 2amp Tbull2 1 40 1491
20
10 ii
123456712345671 23456 Stomach fullness
HAGERMAN Stoclc A and B 01 June t bull 2484 ft bull86 r 21
DWORSHAK Progeny study gltJun L bull 213B ftbull162 1bull26
DWDRSHAK atSk1rnani1 04 Junt t bull 1970 nbull 10 Tbull 27
HAGERMAN S1oclcA 10luftt
t ftbull 89 r 2gt
71234567
KEY TO FULLNESS VALUES
1 bull E mPtV stomach 2 bull Trace of food 3 bull Quar11r full 4 bull Half lull S bull Three quarters tun ampbull Full 7 bull On1nd1d Shaa1d bull No1 1111n9
when CIPIUfed Unshaded bull Eaung
vhtn cao1urd
Figure 60--Stomach fullness frequency curves for steelhead captured at Jones Beach 1982 and 1983 Source study descriptor date of median fish recovery mean length (mm) number observed and mean fullshyness value are included
174
5 Interspecific Comparisons During May the time period of peak out-migration mean stomach fullness of yearling chinook salmon decreased coincidentally with increased migrants passing Jones Beach No decrease was observed for subyearling chinook salmon or the other salmonid species To determine if the decline in stomach fullness might show evidence of density dependence we correlated daily mean stomach fullness of purse seine captured yearling chinook salmon to accumulated catch per set (ACPS) of all yearling salmonids captured in May and June 1980-1983 In all years there was inverse correla tion ( r = -0 70 -0 61 -0 60 and -0 37 for 1980 1981 1982 and 1983) Fullness values for yearling chinook salmon declined during increasing CPS in early May and continued to decline as CPS decreased in late May Only in 1981 did fullness values increase in June (Fig 51) in 1980 few yearling fish were captured following the 18 May eruption of Mount St Helens and in 1982 and 1983 negative slopes for mean fullness values occurred during early June for all yearling salmonids In 1983 sufficient numbers of tagged coho salmon were captured during mid-June to July for analysis These fish showed increased feeding during months when migration of all yearling fish was minimal
6 Effects of Time and Tide We examined fullness data collected duringMay and June 1980-1983 for relationships to hour of catch There was high variability in the data and correlations were poor To eliminate some of the
middot variability we selected for fish captured less than 2 h after sunrise(morning) and compared their mean stomach fullness to that of fish capturedmore than 6 h after sunrise (afternoon) (Table 43) Each year coho andsubyearling chinook salmon captured in the beach seine had higher meanfullness values in the afternoon than in the morning (7 out of 8 comparisonswere significant Plt005) Fish captured in the purse seine showeddifferences between morning and afternoon mean fullness values in bothdirections and no trend was observed
Little or no relationship was observed be tween fullness values and tide Preliminary analyses comparing fullness value to time intervals from high or low slack tide were poorly correlated
Diet Composition and Overlap--Stomach contents from a sample of each species captured 6-19 May 1980 were identified to examine interspecific dietary overlap Overlap calculations were performed at the ordinal level of identification using biomass to characterize the diets Unidentified insects and fish were omitted from the analysis ( only one fish was conswned--by a subyearling chinook salmon we felt it was anomalous data) A C A value of 06 is considered significant overlap (Zaret and Rand 1971)
The diet of subyearling chinook salmon was distinct from that of steelhead (C = 02) but had significant overlap with yearling chinook salmon (C = 06) and coho salmon (C = 08) (Table 44) Cladocera was the most distinctive item in the diet of subyearling chinook salmon (7 IRI) Amphipoda and Insecta (primarily Diptera) together with Cladocera accounted for over 90 of the IRI (Fig 61)
At the ordinal level of prey identification yearling chinook salmon showed significant dietary overlap with coho salmon (C = 06) and steelhead (C = 06) (Table 44) All three species fed heavily on Amphipoda and Insecta
175
Table 43--Comparison of morning and afternoon mean stomach fullness values for juvenile salmonids captured at Jones Beach during May and June 1980-1983
--------------------------------------------- middot---------------------------------
_Morbullninq_b Afternoon cl
me11n mean
Yen Species LocGtion g n -Fullness n fullness t-v1lue--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1980 Coho solmon Shore 47 29 19 39 23 Q_ 1981 I I 18 35 23 4t1 1 5 1982 I 78 36 44 42 29 fl 1983 D 68 34 67
middot39 25middot _g
1980 Mid river 138 44 30 42 07 l981 I I 217 38 47 42 18
1982 403 39 46 39 -01l983 529 37 164 38 12
1980 Yearling chinook s1lmon 63 39 5 32 -1 o
1981 bull 77 31 41 39 37 g1982 47 34 10 32 -09
1983 I 76 2a 34 30 oa
1980 Steel head 96 27 15 37 23 fl 19B1 D 86 29 41 38 41 g 1982 I I 50 30 27 3+2 o71983 bull 137 24 77 25 06
1980 S11bye1 r 1 ing chinooK s1lmon Shore 187 35 124 40 33 QI 1981 bull 450 32 175 39 62 f 1982 I bull 584 39 127 4+8 70 gl 1983 I 227 39 127 43 2 5 g
1980 Mid river 41 5 1 23 4+1 -28 QI1981 136 38 28 39 os
l982 196 4+1 54 44 18
1983 I 100 39 44 4 1 oe
J1 Shoreline sampling with 1 be1ch seine mid-river sampling with 1 p1Jrse seine Insufficient yearling chinook salmon and steelheod were captured in the beach seine for evaluation
b Morning defined 1s less than 2 hour-s 1fter sunrise S Afternoon defined is g re1ter th1n 6 hours ifter sunrise d Differences in morning mean fullness significantly different than 1ftershy
noon mean fullness CPS 005)
176
Table 44--Diet overlap of juvenile salmonids captured at Jones Beach 6-19 May 1980
Fish species compared Overlaplu X y
Subyr chinook salmon= Yr chinook salmon o6Y Coho salmon osYti Steel head 02
Yr chinook salmon Coho salmon o621 Steel head o621
Coho salmon Steel head 03
a Classifications of food categories to order with unidentified insects and items which constitute less than 1 of the total biomass present omitted b Index of diet overlap from Morisita (1959) as modified by Horn (1966) based upon the proportional biomass of diet items present in two species c Biomass of one fish present in the stomach of a single subyearling chinook salmon omitted d An overlap value of 06 or greater is considered significant (Zaret and Rand 1971)
177
100
80 cc -
a 60 l C
8 40
E g en 20
6-19 MAY 1980
Coho Salmon
Yearling ChinookSalmon
Steel head Subyearling Chinook Salmon
0 __ _ __ _ __ __ __ _ ____ _ _____ __ ___ n = 92 n = 47 n = 36 n = 37
j to4----Mostly mid-river----1ril-lXnel-
FISH
Km PLANT MATERIAL
CRUSTACEA
ffic1adocera [I] Amphopoda
INSECTA
Trichoptera Coleoptera
Ephemeroptera
Hymenoptera Diptera
Unidentifiable
Figure 61--Modified index of relative importance (IRI) for food items consumed by juvenilemiddotsalmonids collected at Jones Beach 6-19 May 1980
178
( from 78 to 96 of the IRI) with dip teran insects predominant in coho and chinook salmon and hymenopteran insects domina ting the diet of steelhead (Fig 61) Plant material accounted for more than 20 of the IRI for both yearling chinook salmon and steelhead
Proximate Analysis--Proximate analysis of stomach contents provided a cursory evaluation of food quality for the four salmonid species (Table 45) Compared to hatchery diets contents of migrants appeared low in protein (26-36) high in carbohydrates (28-39) and ash (13-24) and
1normal in fat
( 6-26) The composition of Oregon Moist Pellet OMP-220 a standard hatchery diet is 52 17 13 and 19 protein carbohydrate ash and fat respectively (Westgate et al 1983) The low protein percentage in the stomach contents of migrant fish may have resulted from more rapid absorption of protein relative to ash and carbohydrates
Stomach Content Weight--In 1982 the mean stomach content weights for s ubyearling and yearling chinook salmon coho salmon and steelhead collected throughout the May and June peak migration period were 055 016 023 and 009 body weight (BW) respectively (Table 46) The BW of stomach contents decreased with increasing body size (Fig 62) as previously observed for juvenile salmonids in culture situations (Buterbaugh and Willoughby 1967)
Statistical correlation of fullness value plus fork length or fish weight to weigh ts of stomach contents was used to evaluate the consistency of the fullness data for 1982 (Table 47) Length produced slightly better correlation than body weight when used as the second independent variable Correlation was highest for subyearling chinook salmon (r = 078) and lowest for yearling chinook salmon (r = 070) By using fullness as an estimator of the actual contents weight (ie integer fullness values used to predict the continuously variable stomach content weight) about 50 of the observed variability in the stomach content weight data was not explained with this model There were two main sources for the variation ( 1) integer fullness values (previously discussed) and (2) estimating volume of food consumed by weighing The first source of error is unavoidable because of the limitations inherent with visual indexes--even expanding the scale might not improve the resolution of the observations The second source could be improved by using weights dried to constant weight (Congleton 1979) Blotted dry weights were used here to better allow for future prey identification
Discussion
Caloric content of food ingested plus metabolic activity are the determinants of adequate nutrition A thorough evaluation of nutritional
20 Reference to trade names does not imply endorsement by the National
Marine Fisheries Service NOAA
179
Table 45--Proximate analysis of stomach contents from juvenile salmonids captured at Jones Beach during May and June 1982
Wet
____ ComQosition_ltfrac34_drt_weight) __ _
Species weight HO Fat Protein Ash Carbohydrate
( g) 2--------middot----------------------------------------------------------
Coho silmon HI 147 822 112 315 230 343 Yr chinooK sr1lmon 15 1 779 262 258 l27 353 Steelhe1d 64 829 sa 351 20s 386 Subyr chinoollt s1lmon 10 1 aoo 120 360 240 280
g Catbullbohyd Nte ctlcuJted by the dif ference
b Eiqhty-four stomichs from liily 1nd June 1981 were 1dded tltJ the 1982 samples to obtain a minimum dry weight of 10g per sGmple
180
Table 46--Mean stomach content weight of juvenile salmonids captured at Jones Beach during May and June 1982
_______ Subyearlin9_chinooK_salmon ________ Yeorlin_chinook_salmon ____ _
g S1mp le
All fish
Fish selected by size
All fish
Fish selected by size
Me1n storr111ch Somple Mean content
weight wej_ght
(n) Cg) (g)
855 67 00371
2-44 5 1 00334
Coho_s1lmon
612 240 00562
186 244 00573
StorMch content
(frac14 BW)
o55
o66
023
023
S1mp 1 e Mein weight
ltngt Cg)
96 391
13 381
108 1090
14 1012
Me1n stom1ch content
weight
(g)
00619
00571
tfbd
00970
0 1087
Stom1ch content
(i BWgt
016
015
009
011
1 On 1 y d11t1 for fish with stomach ftJllnes v1lues gt2 (feeding fish) were 1Jsed Stomach content weight as a percent of body weight bull f Size slection t- 10frac14 of the me 11n weight cf fih c1ptured egtcept for
subyearling chinooK salmon for which 5g plusmn 10 was used for analysis to compare with fish from other areas
181
Table 47--Multi-linear relationships between stomach content weight fullness value and fork length or body weight for juvenile salmonids captured at Jones Beach during 1982
MODEL A--FORK LENGTH
Y = B + B X + B X
0 1 1 2 2 A 13 QI
Where Y= Stomach content weight Cg )
Q X = Fullness 3-6 1
-X = Forllt length ltmmgt 2
Species n BO
------------------- --------
Coho s1lmon 595 -004762
Yr chinoollt Sbullll t 191 -011073
Bl
--------
0073123
0088765
B2
---------
00008154
00009689
Steelhe11d 100 -023261 o1osa70 00011684
SbullJbmiddotr chinoollt s11 1314 -011986 0057360 00020409
MODEL B--WEIGHT A
y = B 0
+ B X
1 1 + B X
2 2A l3 g_
Where Y= Stomach content weight Cg )
til X = fullness 3-6
1
X = fish weight (g) 2
-------------------
Coho salmon 595
Yr chinooK sal 191
SteelheGd 100
Subyr chinook sal 1314
003373 0073175 00012856
000713 0089054 00008066
-005957 0108370 00008304
002353 0057047 00047920
Regression coefficient
r
074
070
071
078
o74
070
071
076
a The cube root transformation of the stomach content weight was used to prodyce normGlly distributed residual values of uniform variance
Jt F1Jllness v1lues 1 2 and 7 omitted fron the 11n1lysis bec1use their relationship to stomach content weight is not linear
182
14 y = B
0 +B
1 (fullness)+B
2 (fish weight)
where y = stomach content weight3
12 -
+- 0 80 mml5 g) - 0 100 mm(10 g)
Q)
gt-
C 0
0
+- C Q) (l _Q)
C ClI -
C 0 (l
c (l co
E 0 -
en
10 6 120 mm(18 g)
08
06
04
02
0 L-J3-------
4---
5---
6
Fullness value
Figure 62 --Percent body weight of stomach contents for 5 10 and 18 g subyearling chinook salmon as predicted from a regression model with stomach fullness and fish weight as predictor variables from Table 47
183
sufficiency for even a few groups of migrants would be difficult and time consuming With substantially less effort evaluation of stomach fullness and content weights provided a preliminary evaluation of feeding behavior and relative food intake for thousands of individuals representing many groups Visual observation of fullness takes about 1 minute per stomach compared with hours in addition to the specialized equipment required for a comprehensive analysis
There are compromises associated with using estimates for fullness and stomach content weight to describe food consumption Comparisons between dissimilar sized fish are affected by nonlinear variation of food requirements over the size range of juvenile migrants (Patrick 1974) Also comparisons between similar sized fish captured at different times are affected by differences in metabolic activity associated with water temperature and differences of caloric intake from the prey i terns consumed The ref ore statistical comparisons of fullness values were made only between mark groups passing Jones Beach within narrow date ranges Significant differences in fullness means were not always directly correlated with fish size but the mean lengths are presented for consideration (Figs 54 55 57 59 and 60)
Fish lose weight in response to low nutritional intake To correctly identify fish groups that have lost weight from malnutrition feeding indices (BW) were calculated using length transformed to a corresponding body weight according to lengthweight relationships observed for tagged fish at Jones Beach (Table 48)
Compensation Mechanism for Low Food Availability --Foraging behavior of fish changes in response to food availability--Dill (1983) termed this adaptive flexibility As hunger increases search for food increases and diet includes less preferred prey Consequently a change in diet or a change in migration rate as well as increased numbers of empty stomachs might be indicators of low food availability A diet change for subyearling chinook salmon was observed at Jones Beach following the eruption of Mount St Helens Sediment deposition reduced the supply of a preferred food item Corophium salmonis which resulted in a diet shift to insects and mysids
Food Consumption Compared with Juveniles in Other Locations-Stomach content weights ( BW) of migrant chinook salmon captured at Jones Beach were compared to those of juveniles in other geographical areas rivers and estuaries and indirectly to traditional feeding rates at hatcheries
1 Subyearling Chinook Salmon Subyearling chinook salmon 77-82 mmfork length captured at Jones Beach during May and June (about 5 g Table 46) averaged ab out half full stomachs 1a11d stomach content weights averagedabout O 7 BW (wet weights Table 46) LI Herrman (1971) found that stomach
21 During May and June the water temperatures at Jones Beach ranged between10 deg and 19 degC (mean 14degC) For this evaluation non-feeding fish were considered atypical migrants and were not used therefore providing a liberal estimated food consumption for fish at Jones Beach
184
Table 48-middotmiddotLenthweight relationships of tagged juvenile salmonids captured
at Jones each during 1982 and 1983
Correlation
Species n Prediction Formula coefficient (r)
A
Coho salmon 3831 wt =
A
1th =
A
Yearling 893 wt =
A
chinook salmon 1th =
Steel head 1462 wt =
A
lth =
A
Subyearling 7215 wt =
middot
chinook salmon 1th =
a wt = weight of fish Cg)
ltn = fork length of fish (mm)
= predicted value
C124x10-5) (lth2 94 gt 096
(51 42) Cwt o 313)
(305x10-6 gt (lth3 22) 0 98
(52 98) (wt 0 bull30 0
(137x10 -5) (lth2 91gt 098
(4990) (wt 0 bull332gt
(6 79x10-6) (lth3 bull08 gt 0 99
(4747) (wt0 bull320
185
content weights averaged 12 BW (wet weights) for similar sized chinook salmon captured in the Chehalis River estuary Washington Healey (1980) reported that stomach content weights ranged from 01 BW in May (during peak abundance) to 5 BW in June for chinook salmon in the Nana imo River estuary British Columbia (wet weights in 1975 dry weights in 1976 and 1977) Becker (1973) found that dry stomach content weights averaged 0 4 dry food to wet body weight for 5-g chinook salmon collected in the Hanford reach of the Columbia River (RKm 591 to 629) Converting these percentages to represent BW (dry weight) assuming preserved fish were 20 dry matter (Healey 1978) the average stomach content weight of Beckers fish was about 2 BW
These comparisons generally indicate that subyearling chinook salmon captured at Jones Beach had low food consumption However both of the aforementioned estuary studies characterize subyearling chinook salmon residing in the estuary (Healey calculated growth of fish in June to be 58 BWday) Likewise fish examined by Becker in the Columbia River were residents of the sampling area Subyearling chinook salmon captured at Jones Beach were actively migrating (average 16 to 18 kmday Dawley et al 1984) and such activity and physiological state (we assume that most are smolts) may affect foraging behavior Loftus and Lenon ( 1977) observed heavy feeding by subyearling chinook salmon during downstream migration in the the Saleha River Alaska Over 99 of juvenile chinook salmon smolts (mean length 73 mm) had fed prior to capture and most stomachs were full and distended Fish
middot were sampled 1544 km upstream from the ocean and those smol ts may not becomparable to smol ts collected only 7 5 km from the ocean at Jones Beach
2 Yearling Chinook Salmon Stomach content weights for yearling chinook salmon were available from two upstream sites in the Columbia River the reservoir of Wan11pum Dam (RKm 707) and the reservoir of John Day Dam (RKm 395) (Rondor) The mean weight of fish captured at RKm 707 was 228 g and stomach contents averaged 06 BW whereas at RKm 395 fish were smaller mean weight of 160 g and stomach contents averaged 08 BW (dry stomach content converted to wet weight samples collected at 0900 h during May) At Jones Beach during May and June stomach content weights for similar sized fish were less 02 BW (n = 27 weight range 200 - 260 g) and 06 BW (n = 9 weight range 120 - 185 g)
3 Coho salmon and Steelhead No data were found regarding food consumption of yearling coho salmon or steelhead in rivers or estuaries
Food Consumption at Hatcheries --Bardach et al (1972) reported that salmon reared in hatcheries at 10deg -15degC require daily rations of about 1 BWday for body maintenance and upwards to 7 BWday for growth (weight of
22 D Rondorf US Fish and Wildlife Service National Fisheries Research Center Willard Station Star Rt Cook WA 98605 pers commun
186
food about 20 water and wet weight of fish) Fairgrave23I found that juvenile coho salmon (10-20 g fish) fed various hatchery diets at 06 BWday or less exhibited negative zero or little growth
Daily and morning hours rations were estimated for migrant fish captured a t Jones Beach in May and June to compare with rations at hatcheries (Table 49) Diel observations of food consumption by juvenile salmonids were not made so we assumed that available daily feeding curves in_published and unpublished literature (Johnson and Johnson 1981 Rondorf lE 1 Table 49) properly represented diurnal feeding behavior of migrants captured at Jones Beach The proportion of the total daily meal present in the gut in mid-morning (0800 to 0900 h) observed in those studies was about 22 Assuming that proportion for average sized migrant fish at Jones Beach (Table 46) the total daily ration for each species was about 30 07 LO and 06 BWday respectively for subyearling and yearling chinook salmon coho salmon and steelhead (wet weight of foo d) If these estimated daily rations are converted to 20 water for comparison to hatchery diets (003 006 013 and 005 BWday respectively) all are substantially below the body maintenance requirements for hatchery feeds
Interspecific Interaction--Species interaction possibly caused lower feeding rates for yearling chi nook salmon in May when all salmonid species were present in the Columbia River in large numbers Stein et al (1972) observed that chinook salmon are less competitive than coho salmon which impacts quantity and quality of food ingested Interaction with steelhead elevated stress among yearling chinook salmon (Park et al 1983 1984) which may also affect their feeding success Subyearling chinook salmon are more shore oriented than the yearling fish thus may not be affected by the increased numbers of yearling migrants The observed decline in food consumption for all yearling fish during early June immediately following the peak migration period suggests one or more of the following (1) the food resources were cropped by large numbers of migrant fish ( 2) the food resources available to the migrants were reduced by increased water volume during June or (3 ) yearling fish passing at the later portion of the migration period were poor foragers
Conclusions
1 Percentages of non-feeding fish within populations observed at JonesBeach were generally lower than 20 10 and 30 for chinook and coho salmon and steelhead respectively
2 Relatively low mean fullness and high incidences of empty stomachs inparticular fish groups were correlated with the following close proximity of
2 31 B Fairgrave Oregon Department Fish and Wildlife 17330 SE Evelyn StClackamas OR pers commun
187
Table 49--Published and unpublished data assessing daily and morning hours food consumption by juvenile salmonids
Total dan River Species Age meal (mg)
Orwell BrookEf Coho New York State salmon 0 106
Orwell Broo New York State Steel head 0 78
Columbia Rivercl Chinook at RKm 395 salmon 1 158 2
Columbia Rivercl Chinook at RKm 707 salmon 1 694
al Daily meal= amount of food consumed per day bl Johnson and Johnson (1981)
Observations at 0800 or 0900 h
stomach Portion of content daily meal
(mg) ()
183 173
140 179
311 197
239 344
Average 223
cl D Rondorf US Fish and Wildlife Service National Fisheries Research Center Willard Station Star Rt Cook WA 98605 pers commun
188
release to recovery site andor short migration period prior to recovery early March release of yearling chinook salmon high turbidity from the eruption of Mount St Helens and disease incidence prior to release at the hatchery Some stocks of fish with high percentages of non-feeding individuals could not be correlated with known physical or biological factors likely to have affected feeding
3 Relatively high mean fullness values were documented for Stayton Pondgroups that were cultured in earthen ponds
4 The turbid water resulting from the eruption of Mount St Helenstemporarily middotmiddot decreased food-- consumption by several stocks of subyearling chinook salmon and coho salmon
5 The eruption of Mount St Helens is not expected to have long termeffects on the food resources of subyearling chinook salmon Their decreased consumption of amphipods and increased consumption of insects mysids and cladocerans appears to be a temporary change Partial restoration of amphipod consumption was observed in 1982 and continued improvement of benthic substrate should allow complete recovery to pre-eruption levels
6 Jones Beach appears to be a geographical area of dietary transitionfor subyearling chinook salmon Other researchers found that fish captured upstream consumed primarily insects and fish captured downstream consumed primarily amphipods whereas fish we captured at Jones Beach consumed both
7 The decline in food consumption of yearling chinook salmon during thepeak outmigration (May) may have been related to interspecific interaction and slow recovery of the food resources available Significant dietary overlaps were indicated between the other salmonids Decreased consumption was not apparent for subyearling chinook and coho salmon and steelhead
8 Food items most important to juvenile salmonids near Jones Beach wereinsects including Dip tera Hymenoptera Coleoptera Ephemeroptera and Trichoptera and crustaceans including Amphipoda and Cladocera
9 Stomach content weights from subyearling and yearling chinook salmoncaptured at Jones Beach were less than similar sized fish examined at other estuarine and riverine locations Results of proximate analyses of stomach contents for fish captured at Jones Beach indicated that the food eaten was not of sufficient quality to compensate for low consumption rates
10 Visual assessment of stomach fullness is a fast and economicalmethod for examining the food consumption of large numbers of fish
189
Introduction
Visceral Fat Content of Subyearling Chinook Salmon Captured at Jones Beach
The quantity of fat within the visceral cavity surrounding the pyloric caeca stomach intestine and spleen of juvenile salmonids was used by Myers (1980) to differentiate between hatchery and wild fish in the Yaquina River estuary In Myers study none of 28 wild coho or 87 wild chinook salmon had fat vis ible in the visceral cavity whereas many of the hatchery fish had internal organs com_pletely obscured by fat bull
middot middot-
We examined tagged subyearling chinook salmon captured at Jones Beach to determine if differences in visceral fat could be used to differentiate between wild and hatchery fish in the Columbia River If clear-cut differences were apparent for tagged hatchery fish then the ratio of wild to hatchery juveniles could be estimated for unmarked fish
In 1983 comparisons of visceral fat between wild and hatchery stocks of subyearling chinook salmon were possible Timing at Jones Beach of wild fish from the Lewis River (96 41bull4 tagged fish mentioned earlier--Table 36) was coincidental with tagged fish from several hatcheries including the Cowlitz Comparison with Cowlitz stock was particularly appropriate because the Lewis and Cowlitz Rivers enter the lower Columbia River at RKm 140 and RKm 109 respectively and the distance of migration was similar for both stocks
Methods
Generally fish used for visceral fat observations were those selected for stomach fullness observations the selection was based on holding time restrictions necessary for fullness observation and time available for additional processing
The body cavities of selected fish were opened longitudinally and the body organs were observed for surrounding fat Observations were quantified numerically 1 = no visible fat 2 = some fat present and 3 = extensive quantities of fat present
Individual fish were weighed to plusmn 0005 g (W) and measured to plusmn 05 mm fork length (L) condition facfor (K) was calculated for each individual according to the formula K = WL
Results
From June through August 1983 a total of 1748 tagged subyearling chinook salmon were examined for quantities of visceral fat (1522 hatchery fish and 226 wild fish) Some individuals within all marked groups examined had visceral fat Twenty eight perc ent of the hatchery fish examined had no observable visceral fat 38 had some fat and 34 had extensive fat
190
( Table 50) Included in the hatchery group were 481 fish released from the Cowlitz Hatchery (31 no fat 36 some fat and 33 extensive fat) There were 226 wild fish from the Lewis River examited (47 no fat 44 some fat and 9 extensive fat)
There was a strong decrease through time for the proportion of Cowlitz Hatchery fish having visceral fat and an increase through time for the Lewis River wild fish (correlation coefficient r = -09 and 06 respectively) (Fig 63) The positive slope for the relationship of visceral fat to date of capture for the wild fish may be related to decreased competition for food during late July and August large numbers of hatchery fish were migrating through the estuary in June in comparison few fish were passing Jones Beach in late July and August More food may be available to later migrants which resulted in increased visceral fat of Lewis River wild fish
Condition factors of fish from Cowlitz Hatchery were nea6
ly constantthrough the date range of recovery overall mean = 104x10- (Fig 64)Conditiamp factors for Lewis River wild fish were higher (overall mean10 7xl0 ) and showed strong positive correlation with date of capture (r = 08) By early August the condition factor of the wild fish reached
-6 110xlO bull
Stomach fullness of the wild fish was cons is ten tl y greater than that of Cowlitz Hatchery fish and of other hatchery fish passing during the period
While examining wild subyearling chinook from the Lewis River we observed a high incidence of nematodes in the visceral cavity ( primarily in the air bladder) During the time period when we consistently recorded the incidence (1 July - 8 September 1983) 64 of the fish observed contained nematodes These fish appeared outwardly heal thy and showed no significant difference in relative stomach fullness from those of the same tag groups without nematodes (Pgt04)
Conclusions
1 Observations of visceral fat content for subyearling chinook salmoncaptured in the Columbia River at Jones Beach are not useful for separating Lewis River wild stock from hatchery fish because a substantial portion of wild fish (53) contained fat and 28 of the hatchery fish observed contained no fat
2 Differences in natural food resources available to wild chi nooksalmon may exist between the Lewis and Yaquina Rivers which could explain the observed difference in the percentage of individuals containing visceral fat (53 and 0 respectively)
191
Table 50--Visceral fat observatio ns from subyearling chinook salmon captured at Jones Beach June through August 1983
Fish observed No fat Some fat Extensive fat Total no no no no
Total hatchery fish 423 28 574 38 525 34 1522
Cowlitz Hatchery fish 147 31 175 36 159 33 481
Lewis River wild fish 106 47 99 44 21 9 226
bull Cowlitz hatchery fish n = 481X Lewis River wild fish n = 226
100
-II
s Q) bull X CJ 1-4
80 bull bull X Q)
ci - bull bull ti
X 1-4 X Q) bulltJ 60 bull Ill
X X gt
bull-
II 40 X s Q) ex Ill
X Q) 1-4 ci
II 20 -
0
1-- July Aug
Date of capture
Figure 63--Temporal plot of the proportion of subyearling chinook salmon of the Lewis River wild and the Cowlitz Hatchery stocks containing fat in the visceral cavity from marked individuals captured at Jones Beach
193
bull Cowlitz hatchery fish n = 481
(0 12 D Lewis River wild fish n = 226
X
D 11 D
D D _- bull 0 D D
bull DCt) D
bull bull D
C 10 0 middot
C 0
9
1 10 20 30 10 20 30
July gtI August gtI
Date of capture
Figure 64--Condition factor for Cowlitz Hatchery and Lewis River wild subyearling chinook salmon by 5-day intervals (intervals with less than nine fish measured were omitted)
194
193
3 Cowlitz Hatchery fish rapidly lost visceral fat following releasefrom the hatchery whereas wild Lewis River fish gained visceral fat during the period of capture at Jones Beach
4 Wil d fish from Lewis River general ly had more food in their stomachsthan hatchery fish
Catches of Non-Salmonids
Introduction
Capturing fish of non-targeted species is inherent in sampling juvenile salmonid populations Migrating and resident species were captured at all times of the year and in large numbers The objective of this part of the report is to document catches of these fish
Results
Non-salmonids comprised nearly 40 of the total catch at Jones Beach (Dawley et al 1985a) Adult and juvenile threespine stickleback Gasterosteus aculeatus and peamouth Mylocheilus caurinus were captured in large numbers year-round Large catches of juvenile American shad Alosa sapidissima were obtained during their migration period (April through November) Two separate size groups were recovered each year Large individuals were general ly captured between April and August with a peak in May when they averaged about 10 5 mm fork length More numerous smaller individuals were captured from July to December peak catches occurred during the fall ( undefined because of limited sampling in the fall) at an average fork length of about 70 mm Eastern banded killifish Fundulus diaphanus were captured in the beach seine in 1971 1981 and 1983 (Ledgerwood et al 1985) the Columbia River is not described as part of the normal geographical range for this species (Scott and Crossman 1973)
In 1980 there was a signif leant increase in beach seine catches of several predator and scavenger fish species at Jones Beach beginning with the heavy turbid ty created by the eruption of Mount St Helens Catches of northern squawfish Ptychocheilus oregonensis prickly sculpin Cottus asper peamouth and suckers Ca tos tomus sp in late May and June were more than double those of previous years (Fig 65) These fish were adults not juveniles It is possible that the increase in the catch resulted from fish being forced out of the Toutle and Cowlitz Rivers by high water temperature and turbidity
Population changes of northern squawfish at Jones Beach were of particular interest due to their role as a predator in other areas (Ricker 1941 Jeppson and Platts 1959 Thompson 1959 Thompson and Tufts 1967 Steigenberger and Larkin 1974 Uremovich et al 1980 Bentley and Dawley 1981) We observed an increase of squawfish during the sampling period Catches escalated from none in 1966 to 1754 in 1981 The trend of population increase was accelerated in 1980 as previously discussed Stomach contents from a subsample of squawfish captured in 1983 were examined to determine the
195
Clgt
-
-
I
Cl)
0
E
z
500
400
300
200
100
700
600
500
400
300
20Q
100
SOUAWFISH
SCULPIN
---- 1977-79 (mean)
- 1980 (actual)
_____ _
- --
Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept
middotSUCKER
500
400
300
200
100
3000
2000
1000
PEAMOUTH
___ I _ _
Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept
Figure 65 --Monthly beach seine catches of predator and scavenger species at Jones Beach for 1977-1979 (3-year means) compared to 1980 The month of May 1980 is divided into catches before and after arrival of highly turbid water
195 195 195 195
extent of preda tion on juvenile salmonids Ninty-five percent of the 197 squawfish examined contained food items primarily crustaceans insects and fish None of the squawfish examined had consumed salmonids For details of
the squawfish population change and stomach content analyses refer to Kirn et al (1985)
197
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
1 Generally subyearling chinook salmon concentrate in shallownear-shore areas of the estuary and when they are in deep water areas they are found within 3 m of the surface However large fish(lt 50lb) and those that migrate long distances (gt 250 km) before entering the estuary do not concentrate in near-shore areas
2 Yearling salmon and steelhead concentrate in mid-river areas exceptearly in the year (March April and early May) presumably prior to smol tif ica tion
3 Most movement of juvenile salmonids through the estuary occurs duringdaylight hours Tidal conditions and direction of flow do not appear to substantially influence diel movement patterns Generally diel movement patterns appear consistent between years and sampling 7 hday in the morning provides samples which are representative of the overall migrant population
4 Timing of the juvenile salmonid migrations into the estuary isprimarily dependent on dates of release from hatcheries and river flow Generally high river flows cause faster migration through the river In some instances fall released fish groups overwintered upstream from Jones Beach and migrated in the spring size of fish and stock differences appear to have influenced the migration timing
5 Movement rates of marked groups of subyearling chinook salmon andcoho salmon increase with size at release and distance of migration From 1966 to 1972 larger individuals of marked groups migrated at a faster rate than smaller fish however within groups observed from 1977 to 1983 the larger individuals did not necessarily move at a faster rate This change of migration behavior may have resulted from a general increase in size of fish at release and for coho salmon specifically later dates of release We speculate both factors increased the proportion of smol ted fish among the smaller individuals of most groups and resulted in more uniform migration rates
6 Movement rates through the estuary and into the ocean are similar torates from release site to the estuary_ indicating that the use of the Columbia River estuary by juvenile salmonids originating upstream from Jones Beach is rather limited compared to documented use of other estuaries
7 Increased river flow causes decreased catch rates of all specieswhich decreases precision of comparisons between time periods An adjustment factor was computed to standardize catch percentages of groups recovered at different flow conditions
8 Total numbers of subyearling chinook salmon yearling chinook salmoncoho salmon or steelhead sampled in the estuary do not relate to numbers of returning adults because overall survival rates are different between stocks However estuarine catch data are useful for within stock examination of survival differences among treatments Generally estuarine samples which show statistically significant differences among groups show similar
198
differences in adult recoveries However many groups which showed differences in returns of adults did not show differences in juvenile sampling
data Trends of survival differences be tween treatment and control groups were attainable from estuarine sampling in evaluations of size at release
release date release site and from particular studies with density nutrition and fish stocks
9 Minimum-size thresholds for migration and survival of Columbia Rivercoho and wild fall chinook salmon and Willamette steelhead were supported with Jones Beach data
10 Baseline data for catch rates for marked groups can be used foridentifying groups which have substantially decreased survival during river migration
11 Food consumption of migrants examined at Jones Beach appears to be
substantially less than in other reaches of the river and in other river systems Interspecific interaction or competition for food may be decreasing
the overall food consumption rates for yearling chinook salmon Adverse environmental conditions from the eruption of Mount St Helens caused
decreased feeding alteration of available food resources and decreased survival of juvenile migrants Cultural practices poor heal th and release timing also affect food consumption of migrants Al though insufficient data are available for evaluation we suspect that decreased feeding rate may
impact survival to adulthood
12 Absence of fat within the viscera of migrants captured at JonesBeach was not usable as an indicator for wild subyearling chinook salmon
13 Resident populations of squawfish have increased dramatically atJones Beach during the period of sampling however there are no signs of
their predation on salmonids
14 Researchers and culturists made extensive use of the estuarine
sampling data to evaluate migration timing and relative success of marked groups Additionally marked fish from specific groups were utilized to compare various physiological changes which occurred during migration to evaluate transmission of disease between stocks originating from different
tributary streams that mingled during migration and to evaluate changes of sex ratio within populations of coho salmon following migration We conclude
that observation of marked fish groups at the terminus of freshwater migration is important to salmonid enhancement activities
199
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The success of this evaluation of estuarine catch data depended upon the cooperation and assistance from perso nnel of state and federal fishery agencies Of primary importance in the study of subyearling chinook salmon survival were personnel of the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Elmo Barney and his staff Jack Bodel and his staff personnel of the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) Ken Johnson Art Oakley Ed Weiss Brunell Boho Vern Knowles and Ray Sheldon and his staff personnel of the Washington Department of Fisheries (WDF) Dick Noble Harry Senn Bob Haggan Bill Hopley Dick Johnson and his staff and Carl Ross and his staff Mark release information and adult recovery data were expedited for our needs we relied heavily on assistance from Steve Leek and Steve Olhausen of USFWS Dennis Issac Harold Hansen Eugene Smith Jeff Zakel Jean Legasse and Lynn Roberts of ODFW Dick OConner Gary Sherman Bob Foster Guy Norman and Rich Schneider of WDF and Rodney Duke of the Idaho Deparment of Fish and Game Our thanks to these individuals for helping produce these data and observations
200
LITERATURE CITED
Albright R G 1982 Population dynamics and production of the amphipod (Corophium
salmonis) in Grays Harbor Washington MS Thesis Univ Washington Seattle WA 76 p
Bardach J E J H Ryther and w O McLarney 1972 Aquaculture The farming and husbandry of freshwater and marine
organisms Wiley-Interscience a division of John Wiley and Sons New York 868 p
Becker D c 1973 Food and growth parameters of juvenile chinook salmon
Oncorhynchus tshawytscha in the central Columbia River US Natl Mar Fish Serv Fish Bull 71(2)387-400
Bentley W W and E M Dawley 1981 Effects of supersaturated dissolved atmospheric gasses on northern
squawfish Ptychocheilus oregonensis Northwest Sci 55(1) 50-61
Bergman P K K B Jefferts H F Fiscus and R C Hager 1968 A preliminary evaluation of an implanted coded wire fish tag
Wash Dep Fish Fish Res Pap 3(1)63-84
Bottom D L 1981 The carrying capacity of Sixes Estuary for fall chinook salmon
Abstract Estuaries 4(3)247
Brzezinski M A and R L Holton1981 A report on the macroinvertebrates of the Columbia River estuary
found in deposits of volcanic ash from the May 18 1980 eruption of Mount St Helens Estuaries 6(2)172-175
Buchanan D V R M Horton M G Wade and J F Mccrae 1979 Willamette River steelhead Oregon Dept of Fish and Wildlife
Portland OR 49 p Annual Report Columbia River Fishery Development Project No 88E25045
Buchanan D V M G Wade R M Horton and W C Wingfield 1981 A minimum threshold size for hatchery steelhead smolts in the
Willamette River system Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Northwest Fish Culture Conference Informal Notes169-170
Buterbaugh G L and H Willoughby 1967 A feeding guide for brook brown and rainbow trout Prog Fish
Cult 29(4)210-215
Chamberlain F M 1907 Some observations on salmon and trout in Alaska Rep US Comm
Fish 1906 p 5-112 (Doc 627)
201
Chang B D and C D Levings 1976 Laboratory experiments on the effects of ocean dumping on
benthic invertebrates 1 Choice tests with solid wastes Can Fish Mar Serv Tech Rep 637 43 p
Chapman D W 1962 Aggressive behavior in juvenile coho salmon as a cause of
emigration J Fish Res Board Can 191047-1080
Chapman D W 1965 Net production of juvenile coho salmon in three Oregon streams
Trans Am Fish Soc 9440-52
Cleaver F J 1969a Effects of ocean fishing on 1961 brood fall chinook salmon from
Columbia River hatcheries Fisheries Commission Research Report Number 1
1969b Recent advances in artificial culture of salmon and steelhead trout of the Columbia River US Fish Wildl Serv Fish Leafl 623 5 p
Congleton J L 1979 Feeding patterns of juvenile chum in the Skagit River salt marsh
In SJ Lipovsky and CA Simenstad (editors) Fish food habits studies 2nd Pacific Northwes t Technical Workshop proceedings October 10-13 1978 Univ Wash Sea Grant WSG-W0-79-1 141-150 p
Conte F P H H Wagner J Fessler and C Gnose 1966 Development of osmotic and ionic regulation in juvenile coho
salmon Oncorhynchus kisutch Comp Biochem Physiol 181-15
Craddock D R T H Blahm and W D Parente 1976 Occurrence and utilization of zooplankton by juvenile chinook
salmon in the lower Columbia River Trans Am Fish Soc 105(1)72-76
Davis J S 1978 Diel activity of benthic crustaceans in the Columbia River
estuary MS Thesis Oregon State Univ Corvallis OR 170 p
Dawley E M C W Sims and R D Ledgerwood 1978 A study to define the migrational characteristics of chinook and
coho salmon and steelhead in the Columbia River estuary US Dep Commer Natl Oceanic Atmos Serv Natl Mar Fish Serv Northwest and Alaska Fish Cent Seattle WA 23 p Annual Report to PNRC
Dawley E M R D Ledgerwood and A L Jensen 1985a Beach and purse seine sampling of juvenile salmonids in the
Columbia River estuary and ocean plume 1977-1983 Volume I Procedures Sampling Effort and Catch Data US Dep Commer NOAA Tech Memo NMFS FNWC-74260 p
202
Dawley E M RD Ledgerwood TH Blahm RA Kirn AE Rankis and FJ Ossiander
1985b Beach and Purse Seine Sampling of Juvenile Salmonids in the Columbia River Estuary and Ocean Plume 1977-1983 Volume II Data on Marked Fish Recoveries US Dep of Comer NOAA Tech Memo NMFS FNWC-75397 p
Dill L M 1983 Adaptive flexibility in the foraging behavior of fishes
Can J Fish Aquat Sci 40398-408
Durkin J T S J Lipovsky G R Snyder and M E Tuttle 1977 Environmental studies of three Columbia River estuarine beaches
US Dep Commer Natl Oceanic Atmos Admin Natl -Mar Fish Serv Northwest and Alaska Fish Cent Seattle WA Processed Report 78 p
Durkin J R T C Coley K Verner and R L Emmett 1981 An aquatic species evaluation at four self scouring sites in the
Columbia River estuary US Dep Commer Natl Oceanic Atmos Admin Natl Mar Fish Serv Northwest and Alaska Fish Cent Seattle WA 46 p (Report to the US Army Corps of Engineers)
Ebel W J 1970 Effect of release location on survival of juvenile fall chinook
salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) Trans Am Fish Soc 99672-676
Efron B and C Morris 1975 Data analysis using Steins estimator and its generalizations J Amer Stat Assoc 70311-319
Elliott J M 1972 Rate of gastric evacuation in brown trout Salmo trutta
Freshwater Biology (2)1-18
Elliott JM and L Perssons 1978 The estimation of daily rates of food consumption for fish J
Anim Ecol 47977-991
Emmett R L 1982 The effects of the May 18 1980 Mount St Helens eruption on the
food habits of four salmonid and two non-salmonid fishes in the Columbia River estuary M S Thesis Univ Oregon Eugene OR 44 p
Environmental and Technical Services Division 1983 An evaluation of the contribution of chinook salmon reared at
Columbia River hatcheries to the Pacific salmon fisheries US Dep of Commer Natl Oceanic Atmos Admin Natl Mar Fish Serv Portland OR 40 p (Report to Bonneville Power Administration Portland OR Project 79-2)
Fulton A 1970 Spawning areas and abundance of steelhead trout and coho sockeye
and chum salmon in the Columbia River basin--past and present US Natl Mar Fish Serv Spec Sci Rep Fish 618 37 p
203
Gunsolus R T and H Wendler (editors) 1975 Status report Columbia River fish runs and commercial fisheries
1938-70 1974 addendum Fish Comm Oreg and Wash Dep Fish Joint Invest Rep 1(5) 44 p
Hansen H L R D Ewing and J T Martin 1979 Bonneville Hatchery evaluation Oregon Dep of Fish and
Wildl Portland OR 22 p (Annual Report to US Army Corps of Engineers Portland OR)
Hansen H L 1982 Bonnveville Hatchery evaluation bull Oregon Dep of Fish and
Wildl Portland OR 21 p (Progress Report Annual Report)
Hart c E G Concannon C A Fustich and R D Ewing 1980 The use of a model system for studying seaward migration of
Deschutes River juvenile spring chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) Oregon Dep of Fish and Wildl Portland OR 20 p (Information Report 80-5)
Hartman W L w R Heard and B Drucker 1967 Migratory behavior of sockeye salmon fry and smolts J Fish
Res Board Can 242069-2099
Haw F ands B Mathews 1969 Recreational use of surplus hatchery coho salmon Trans Am
Fish Soc 98487-496
Hazel C R and D W Kelley 1966 Zoobenthos of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Calif Dep Fish
Game Fish Bull 133(1)113-133
Healey M C 1978 The distribution abundance and feeding habits of juvenile
Pacific salmon in Georgia Strait British Columbia Fish Mar Serv Tech Rep 788 49 p
1980 Utilization of the Nanaimo River estuary by juvenile chinook salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha Fish Bull 77(3)653-668
Herrman R B 1971 Food of juvenile chinook and chum salmon in the lower Chehalis
River and upper Grays Harbor p 59-82 In Grays Harbor cooperative water quality study 1964 through 1966 Wash Dep of Fish Tech Report 7
Heubach w
1969 Neomysis awatschensis in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River estuary Limnol Oceanogr 14(4)533-546
Holway J E 1982 Eagle Creek NFH density study progress report Proceedings of the
33rd Northwest Fish Culture Workshop Informal Notes 195-202
204
Hopkins T L 1958 Mysid shrimp important fish food Estuarine Bull 3(2)4-6
Horn H S 1966 Measurement of overlap in comparative ecological studies
Am Nat 100419-424middot
Jefferts K B P K Bergman and H Fiscus 1963 A coded wire identification system for macro-organisms Nature
(London) 198460-462
Jeppson P W and W S Platts 1959 Ecology and control of the Columbia squawfish in northern Idaho
lakes Trans Am Fish Soc 88(3) 197-202
Johnsen R C and C W Sims 1973 Purse seining for juvenile salmon and trout in the Columbia River
estuary Trans Am Fish Soc 102341-345
Johnson J H and E Z Johnson 1981 Feeding periodicity and diel variation in diet composition
of subyearling coho salmon Oncorhynchus kisutch and steelhead Salmo gairdneri in a small stream during summer US Natl Mar Fish Serv Fish Bull 79(2)370-376
Kirn R A R D Ledgerwood and R A Nelson 1985 Increase in abundance and food consumption of northern squawfish
(Ptychocheilus oregonensis) in the Columbia River Unpubl manuscr US Dep Commer Natl Oceanic Atmos Admin Natl Mar Fish Serv Northwest and Alaska Fish Cent Seattle WA 10 p
Kleinbaum D G and L L Kupper 1978 Applied regression analysis and other multivariable methods
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Duxbury Press North Scituate MA 486 p
Knox W J M W Fisher R B Lindsay and L S Lutz 1984 Spring chinook studies in the John Day River Oregon Dep of Fish
and Wildl Portland OR 27 p (Annual Report to Bonneville Power Administration Project No 79-4)
Lander R H 1970 Distribution in marine fisheries of marked chinook salmon from the
Columbia River Hatchery Program 1963-66 Fisheries Commission of Oregon Research Report Number 2 35-43
Ledgerwood R L A E Rankis and C E Bond 1985 Banded killifish Fundulus diaphanus increasing in lower Columbia
River US Dep Commer Natl Oceanic Atmos Admin Natl Mar Fish Serv Northwest and Alaska Fish Cent Seattle WA (manuscr)
205
Lindsay R B J s Ziller and R K Schroeder 1982 An ecological and fish cultural study of the Deschutes River
salmonids Oregon Dep of Fish and Wildl Portland OR 32 p (Project No F-8 8-R-13)
Loftus W F and H L Lenon 1977 Food habits of the salmon smolts Oncorhynchus tshawytscha
and o keta from the Saleha River Alaska Trans Am Fish Soc 106(3) 235-240
MacDonald J s and R H Green 1983 Redundancy of variables used to describe importance of prey
species in fish diets Can J Fish Aquat Sci 40635-637
Mains E M and J M Smith 1964 The distribution size time and current preferences of seaward
migrant chinook salmon in the Columbia and Snake Rivers Washington Department of Fisheries Research Paper Number 2 35-43
McCabe G T Jr T c Coley R L Emmett W D Muir and J T Durkin 1981 The effects of the eruption of Mount St Helens on fishes in the
Columbia River estuary (Abstract) Estuaries 4(3)247
Meyer J H T A Pearce and S B Patlan 1981 Distribution and food habits of juvenile salmonids in the Duwamish
estuary Washington 1980 US Dep Inter US Fish Yildl Serv Fish Asst Off Olympia WA (Prepared for Seattle District US Army Corps of Engineers) 43 p
Mighell J L 1969 Rapid cold-branding of salmon and trout with liquid nitrogen
J Fish Res Board Can 262765-2769
Miller D R and C Y Sims 1983 Effects of flow on migratory behavior and survival of juvenile
fall and summer chinook salmon in John Day reservoir US Dep Commer Na t1 Oceanic Atmos Admin Natl Mar Fish Serv Northwest and Alaska Fish Cent Seattle WA 25 p (Report to the Bonneville Power Administration Portland OR Contract DE-Al79-81BP-27602
Milne D J and E A R Ball 195 6 The mortality of small salmon when caught by trolling and tagged
or released untagged Fish Res Board Can Prog Rep Pac Coast Stu 10610-13
Morisita M 1959 Measuring of interspecific association and similarity between
communities Mem Fae Sci Kyushu Univ Ser E Biol 365-80
206
Myers K W 1979 Comparative analysis of stomach contents of cultured and wild
juvenile salmonids in Yaquina Bay Oregon In SJ Lipovsky and CA Simenstad (editors Fish food habits studies 2nd Pacific Northwest Technical Workshop proceedings October 10-13 1978 Univ Wash Sea Grant WSG-W0-79-1 155-162 p
1980 An investigation of the utilization of four study areas in Yaquina Bay Oregon by hatchery and wild juvenile salmonids Masters Thesis Oregon State University Corvallis OR 97331 233 p
Netboy middotA 1980 The Columbia River salmon and steelhead trout Their fight for
survival University of Washington Press Seattle WA 180 p
Newcomb T W and T A Flagg 1983 Some effects of Mount St Helens volcanic ash on juvenile
salmonid smolts Natl Oceanic Atmos Admin Natl Mar Fish Serv Mar Fish Rev 45(2)8-12
Nicholas J W P E Reimers and J M Hutchison 1979 The potential impact of releasing hatchery coho salmon on wild
juvenile chinook salmon in the Siuslaw estuary Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Research Section Information Report Series Fisheries 79-7 24 p
Norman G 1984 North Lewis River wild stock fall chinook tagging project and
post-tagging recapture 1983 State of Washington Department of Fisheries Olympia WA Intra-Agency Memorandum 6 p plus figures and tables
Orsi J J and A C Knutson Jr 1979 The role of mysid shrimp in the Sacramento-San Joaquin estuary and
factors affecting their abundance and distribution Am Assoc Adv Sci Pac Div 58th Annu Meet p 401-408
Park D L J R Smith E Slatick G M Matthews L R Basham and G A Swan
1978 Evaluation of fish protective facilities at Little Goose and Lower Granite Dams and review of mass transportation activities 1977 US Dep Commer Natl Oceanic Atmos Admin Natl Mar Fish Serv Northwest and Alaska Fish Cent Seattle WA 60 p (Report to the US Army Corps of Engineers Walla Walla WA Contract DACW68-77-C-0043
Park D L G M Matthews J R Smith T E Ruehle J R Harmon and S Achord
1984 Evaluation of transportation of juvenile salmon and related research on the Columbia and Snake Rivers 1983 US Dep Commer Na t1 Oceanic Atmos Admin Na t1 Mar Fish Serv Northwest and Alaska Fish Cent Seattle WA 58 p (Annual Report to US Army Corps of Engineers Walla Walla WA Contract DACW68-78-C-005 4)
207
Parker R R E C Black and P A Larkin 1959 Fatigue and mortality in troll caught Pacific salmon
Oncorhynchus) J Fish Res Board Can 16429-448
Pa trick B J 1974 Carrying capacity and the trout farm Aquaculture and the fish
farmer 1(3)22-25
Peck J W 1970 Straying and reproduction of coho salmon Oncorhynchus kisutch
middotplanted in a Lake Superior tributary Trans Am Fish Soc 99591-595
Pennak R W 1978 Fresh-water invertebrates of the United States Second edition
John Wiley and Sons New York 803 p
Pinkas L M S Oliphant and I L K Iverson 1971 Food habits of albacore bluefin tuna and bonita in California
waters Calif Fish Game Fish Bull 1521-46
Pruter A T 1966 Commercial fisheries of the Columbia River and adjacent ocean
waters US Fish and Wildl Serv Fish Ind Res 3(3)17-68
Raymond H L 1968 Migration rates of yearling chinook salmon in relation to flows
and impoundments in the Columbia and Snake Rivers Trans Am Fish Soc 97356-359
1979 Effects of dams and impoundments on migrations of juvenile chinook salmon and steelhead from the Snake River 1966 to 1975 Trans Am Fish Soc 108505-569
Reimers P E and R E Loeffel 1967 The length of residence of juvenile fall chinook salmon in
selected Columbia River tributaries Research Briefs Fish Commission of Oregon Vol 13(1)5-19
Reimers P E 1973 The length of residence of juvenile fall chinook salmon in Sixes
River Oregon Research Reports of the Fish Commission of Oregon Vol 4 2) 43 p
Ricker W E 1941 The consumption of young sockeye salmon by predaceous fish J
Fish Res Board Can 5(3) 293-313
Salo E O 1955 Silver salmon Oncorhynchus kisutch survival studies at Minter
Creek Washington PhD Thesis University of Washington Seattle WA 183 p
208
Salo E 0 and W H Bayliff 1958 Artificial and natural production of silver salmon Oncorhynchus
kisutch at Minter Creek Washington Wash Dept Fish Res Bull 482 p
Schneider R and R W Foster 1981 Quality improvement studies October
Washington Dep Fisheries Olympia WA Fish Serv Environmental and Technical OR)
Scott W B and E T Crossman
1 1980-September 30 1981 (Final Report to Natl Mar Services Division Portland
1973 Freshwater fishes of Canada Bull Fish Res Board Can 184 966 p
Shapovalov L and A C Taft 1954 The life histories of the steelhead rainbow trout (Salmo gairdneri
gairdneri) and silver salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) with special reference to Waddell Creek California and recommendations regarding their management Calif Dep Fish Game Fish Bull 98 375 p
Siegfried C A M E Kopache and A W Knight 1979 The distribution and abundance of Neomysis mercedis in relation to
the entrapment zone in the Western Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Trans Arn Fish Soc 108(3)262-270
Siegfried C A M E Kopache and A W Knight 1980 The benthos of a portion of the Sacramento River (San Francisco
Bay estuary) during a dry year Estuaries 3(4)296-307
Sims C W and R C Johnsen 1974 Variable mesh beach seine for sampling juvenile salmon in the
Columbia River estuary US Natl Mar Fish Serv Mar Fish Rev 36(2)23-26
Sims C W and F J Ossiander 1981 Migrations of juvenile chinook salmon and steelhead trout in
the Snake River 1973 to 1979 a research summary US Dep Commer Natl Oceanic Atmos Admin Natl Mar Fish Serv Northwest and Alaska Fish Cent Seattle WA 31 p plus Appendix (Report to US Army Corps of Engineers Walla Walla WA Contract DACW68-78-C-0038)
Sims C W J G Williams D A Faurot R C Johnsen and D A Brege 1981 Migrational characteristics of juvenile salmon and steelhead in
the Columbia River basin and related research at John Day Dam Vol I and II US Dep Commer Natl Oceanic Atmos Admin Natl Mar Fish Serv Northwest and Alaska Fish Cent Seattle WA 61 p (Report to the US Army Corps of Engineers Portland OR and Walla Walla WA Contracts DACW57-80-F-0394 and DACW68-78-C-0051)
209
Sims C W R C Johnsen and D A Brege 1981 Migrational characteristics of juvenile salmon and steelhead trout
in the Columbia River system 1981 US Dep Commer Natl Oceanic Atmos Admin Natl Mar Fish Serv Northwest and Alaska Fish Cent Seattle WA 16 p (Report to the US Army Corps of Engineers Walla Walla WA and Portland OR Contracts DACW68-78C-0051 and DACW57-81-F-0342)
Sims C W A E Giorgi R C Johnsen and D A Brege 1983 Migrational characteristics of juvenile salmon and steelhead in
the Columbia River basin 1982 US Dep Commer Natl Oceanic Atmos Admin Natl bull Mar Fish Serv Northwest and Alaska Fish Cent Seattle WA 35 p (Report to the US Army Corps of Engineers Portland OR and Walla Walla WA Contracts DACW57-82-F-0397 and DACW68-78-C-0051)
Sims C W A E Giorgi R C Johnsen and D A Brege 1984 Migrational characteristics of juvenile salmon and steelhead in
the Columbia River basin - 1983 US Dep Commer Natl Oceanic Atmos Admin Natl Mar Fish Serv Northwest and Alaska Fish Cent Seattle WA 31 p plus Appendixes (Report to US Army Corps of Engineers Walla Walla WA and Portland OR Contracts DACW68-78-C-0051 and DACW57-83-F-0314)
Smith E M 1979a Improving survival of spring chinook hatchery smolts in the
Willamette River Oregon Dep of Fish and Wildl Portland OR 23 p (Annual Progress Report)
1979b Willamette River spring chinook evaluation Marion Forks Hatchery evaluation McKenzie River Hatchery evaluation Oregon Dep of Fish and Wildl Portland OR 23 p (Annual Progress Report)
Smith E M and J C Zakel 1980 Willamette River spring chinook evaluation Impr oving
survival of spring chinook smolts from Willamette River Hatcheries Marion Forks Hatchery evaluation McKenzie River Hatchery evaluation Oregon Dep of Fish and Wildl Portland OR 52 p (Annual Progress Report)
1981 Willamette River spring chinook evaluation Improving survival of spring chinook smolts from Willamette River Hatcheries Marion Forks Hatchery evaluation McKenzie River Hatchery evaluation Oregon Dep of Fish and Wildl Portland OR 32 p (Annual Progress Report)
210
Smith E M R H Williams and J C Zakel 1982 Willamette River Salmon Studies Marion Fork Hatchery evaluation
McKenzie River Hatchery evaluation Oregon Dep of Fish and Wildl Portland OR 50 p (Annual Progress Report)
1983 Willamette River Salmon Studies McKenzie River Hatchery evaluation Oregon Dep of Fish and Wildl Portland OR 23 p (Annual Progress Report)
1984 Willamette River Salmon Studies McKenzie River Hatchery evaluation Oregon Dep of Fish and Wildl Portland OR 12 p (Annual Progress Report)
Snyder G R 1980 Effects of starvation on presmolt coho salmon
(Oncorhynchus kisutch) PhD dissertation Univ Idaho Moscow ID 129 p
Sokal R R and F J Rohlf 1981 Biometry WH Freeman and Co San Francisco CA 779 p
Steigenberger L W and P A Larkin 1974 Feeding activity and rates of digestion of northern squawfish
(Ptychocheilus oregonensis) J Fish Res Board Can 31411-420
Stein R A P E Reimers and J D Hall 1972 Social interaction between juvenile coho (Oncorhynchus kisutch)
and fall chinook salmon (0 tshawytscha) in Sixes River Oregon J Fish Res Bd Canada 291737-1748
Stober Q O Ross S Melby P Dinnel and E Salo 1980 Preliminary report on effects of suspended volcanic sediment on
salmon passage and survival University of Wash FRI No 8103 Seattle WA 98195
Terry C 1977 Stomach analysis methodology still lots of questions Fish Food
Habits studies In CA Simenstad and SJ Lipovsky (editors) Fish food habits studies 1st Pacific Northwest Technical Workshop proceedings October 13-15 1976 p 87-92 Univ Wash Seattle Div Mar Resources Washington Sea Grant WSG-WO 77-2
Thompson R B 1959 Food of squawfish (Ptychocheilus oregonensis Richardson of Lower
Columbia River US Fish Wildl Serv Fish Bull 158(60) 43-58
Thompson R B and D F Tufts 1967 Predation by dolly varden and northern squawfish on
hatchery-reared sockeye salmon in Lake Wenatchee Washington Trans Am Fish Soc 96424-427
211
Thrower F P R D Ledgerwood and E M Dawley 1985 Diel sampling of migratory juvenile salmonids in the Columbia
River estuary Unpubl rnanuscr US Dep Commer Natl Oceanic Atmos Adrnin Natl Mar Fish Serv Northwest and Alaska Fish Cent Seattle WA 21 p
Turk T R and M J Risk 1981 Effect of sedimentation on infaunal invertebrate populations of
Cobequid Bay Bay of Fundy Can J Fish Aquat Sci 38642-648
Turk T R M J Risk R W M Hirtle and R K Yeo 1980 Sedimentological and biological changes in theWindsor mudflat
an area of induced siltation Can J Fish Aquat Sci 371387-1397
Turner J L and W Heubach 1966 Distribution and concentration of Neomysis awatschensis in the
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Calif Dep Fish Game Fish Bull 133(1) 105-112
Uremovich B L S P Cramer C F Willis and c O Junge 1980 Passage of juvenile salmonids through the ice-trash sluiceway
and squawfish predation at Bonneville Dam 1980 Oregon Dep Fish Wildl Clackamas 46 p (Progress Report to US Army Corps of Engineers Portland OR)
US Army Corps of Engineers 1977-1983 Annual fish passage report Columbia and Snake Rivers for
salmon steelhead and shad US Army Corps of Engineers North Pacific Division Portland OR
US Geological Survey 1965-71 [Weekly information on run-off] US Dep Inter Geol
Surv Portland OR Pac Northwest Water Resour various pagination
Van Hyning J M 1973 Factors affecting the abundance of fall chinook salmon in the
Columbia River Fish Comm Oreg Res Rep 4(1)87 p
Vreeland R R 1984 Evaluation of the contribution of chinook salmon reared at
Columbia River hatcheries to the Pacific salmon fisheries US Dep Commer Natl Oceanic Atmos Admin Natl Mar Fish Serv Portland OR 85 p (Report to Bonneville Power Administration Portland OR Project 79-2)
Wallis J 1968 Recommended time size and age for release of hatchery reared
salmon and steelhead trout Oregon Dep of Fish and Wildl Portland OR 61 p (Fish Comm Oreg Proc Rep
212
Ward H B and G C Whipple 1918 Fresh-water biology Reprint H B Ward and G M Keith
1945 John Wiley and Sons Inc New York 1111 p
Washington P 1982 An analysis of factors affecting the production of coho salmon
( Oncorhynchus kisu tch in the Columbia River Univ of Washingtion Seattle WA PhD Thesis 228 p
Westgate J W A R Hemmingsen and J R Conrad 1981 Hatchery Biology - Columbia River Fishery Development Program
Oregon Dep Fish and Wildl Portland OR 43 p (Project No F 1100088E270444119)
Westgate J W A R Hemmingsen and R A Holt 1982 Hatchery Biology - Columbia River Fishery Development Program
Oregon Dep of Fish and Wildl Portland OR 21 p (Project No F 1100088E270444119)
1983 Columbia River Fishery Development Program Oregon Dep of Fish and Wildl Portland Oregon 33 p (Project No FMP 500812 AR 7004119)
Westgate J J Lagasse and T Unterwegner 1983a Salmonid nutritional studies Annual Progress Report Fish
culture project by Oregon Dep Fish and Wildl Contract 14-16-0001-82-411 526 SW Mill St Portland OR 97208
1983b Salmonid Nutritional Studies Annual Progress Report Project No 75-3 27p
Wilson S L 1983 The life history of Corophium salmonis in the Columbia River
estuary MS Thesis Oregon State Univ Corvallis OR 66 p
Witty K 1966 Travel rate of downstream-migrant coho salmon Prog Fish-Cult
28(3)174
Worlund D D R J Wable and P D Zimmer 1969 Contribution of Columbia River hatcheries to harvest of fall
chinook salmon ( Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) Fish and Wildl Serv Fish Bull 67361-391
Zaret T M and A S Rand 1971 Competition in tropical stream fishes support for the
competitive exclusion principle Ecology 52336-342
Zaugg W S 1970 Comments on the relationship between ATPase activities migration
and salt water adaptation of coho salmon Trans Am Fish Soc 99 811-813
213
Zaugg W S + + 1981 Freshwate r gi ll Na -K ATPase activities and migration of coho
and fall chinook salmon from selected hatche ries 32 p In P re ntice e t al 1981 A study to assess status of smol tif ica tion and fitness for ocean survival of chinook and coho salmon and steelhead US Dep Comme r Na t1 Oceanic Atmos Admin Na t1 Mar Fish Serv Northwest and Alaska Fish Ce nt Seattle WA (Annual Report to Northwest Regional Commission)
214
APPENDIX A
Uses of Estuarine Catch Data and Biological Samples or Observa tions Collected for Related Research
215
INTRODUCTION
Upon request biological observations were made and tissue samples
collected for other research programs Tissues and internal organ
observations were only made from fish sacrificed for tag identification The
objective of this section of the report is to provide examples showing how
data obtained at Jones Beach are being used by managers and other
researchers
BIOLOGICAL SAMPLES
1 Gas bubble disease incidence for water regulation and smolt release
timing by the Columbia River Fish and Wildlife Commission (1977-83)
2 Gill tissue samples for adenosine triphosphatase (Na+-K+ ATPase)
analysis by researchers from NMFsY (1978-83) and OD (1978-79)
3 Scales for comparison with adult scales by ODFWJ (1979-83)
Washington Department of Game2 (WDG) (1980-81) University of Washington
(U of w)2f (1982-83) and Oregon State University (osu)Jl (1982-83)
4 Stomach samples for basic research by USFw (1979) and WD
(1980)
JJ Columbia River Fish and Wildlife Commission Lloyd Bldg Suite 1240 NE ltnomah St Portland Oregon 97232 - W S Zaugg NMFS Star Rt Cook WA 98605 Ron Williams ODFW 303 Extension Hall OSU Corvallis OR 97331 bull Concannon G ODFW PO Box 182 Maupin OR 97037 Hansen H ODFW 1733 Evelyn Street Clackamas OR 97015 and Murphy s ODFW Oregon ate University Corvallis OR 97331 - Loch J WDG 1351 Kalama River Rd Kalama WA 986252 Mathews S U of W School of Fisheries Seattle WA 98195 If Fisher J School of Oceanography OSU Corval lis OR 97331 E Washington P USFWS Naval Support Activity Bldg 204 Seattle WA 98115
216
5 Incidence of enteric red-mouth in marked fall chinook salmon from
Bonneville Hatchery for survival comparison byODFw2f (1979)
6 Incidence of sunburn in marked coho salmon from Willard NFH for
survival comparison by USFWS (1979)lO
7 Sex determinations for survival comparisons of coho by USFWs2J
(1981-82) 8
8 Smolt carcasses for a salmon predation study of marine mammals by
woG (19 8 2) bull
9 Branded fish for bioenergetics study by USFWsY (1982-83)
10 Live unmarked fish for disease study by ostillf (1982-83)
11 Incidence of nematode infestation in wild fish from the Lewis River
for researchers from Washington Department of Fisheries (WDF)J (1983)
REP ORTS AND PUBLICATI ONS
Aho R G Concannon J Ziller S Pribyl and K Schroeder 1979 An ecological and fish cultural study of Deschutes River salmonids
Oregon Dep of Fish and Wildl Portland OR 29 p (Annual Progress Report)
Aho R G Concannon J Ziller S Pribyl K Schroeder K Anderson and R Hill
1979 An ecological and fish study of Deschutes of wild spring chinook in the Deschutes River spring chinook rearing program at Round Butte Oregon Dep of Fish and Wildl Portland OR Progress Report)
River salmonids Study and an evaluation of the Hatchery (10-786-80)
77 p (Annual
2J Knowles V ODFW Bonneville Hatchery PO Box 262 Bonneville OR 9190a Leek S USFWS Little White Salmon NFS Cook WA 98605IT Beach R J WDG 35 Partway Astoria OR 97103 TI Rondorf D USFWS Cook WA 98605 T4 Fryer J L OSU Corvallis OR 97331 - Guy Norman WDF 16118 NE 219th St PO Box 999 Battle Ground WA98604
217
Bjornn T C R R Ringe and J King 1981 Role of short distance migration on the homing of salmon and
steelhead ID Cooperative Fishery Research Unit University of Idaho Moscow ID (Report to Natl Mar Fish Serv Seattle WA)
Buchanan D R Hooten M Wade and J McCrae 1979 Willamette River Steelhead Oregon Dep Fish and Wildl
Portland OR 49 p (Annual Progress Report)
Buchanan D V M G Wade R M Horton and W C Wingfield 1981 A mjnimum threshold size for hatchery steelhead smolts in the
Willamette River system Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Northwest Fish Culture Conference (Informal Records of Presentation)169-170
Burck W R Lindsay B Smith and E Olsen 1979 Spring chinook studies in the John Day River (10-7812-79)
Oregon Dep of Fish and Wildl Portland OR 63 p (Annual Progress Report)
Burck W R Lindsay B Smith and E Olsen 1980 Spring chinook studies in the John Day River Oregon Dep of
Fish and Wildl Portland OR 69 p (Annual Progress Report)
Concannon G J Ziller K Schroeder and K Anderson 1980 An ecological and fish cultural study of Deschutes River
salmonids study of wild spring chinook in the John Day and Deschutes River and an evaluation of the spring chinook rearing program at Round Butte Hatchery Oregon Dep of Fish and Wildl 57 p (Annual Progress Report)
Dawley E M 1982 Forklength changes of juvenile salmonid populations following
migration through the Columbia River Proceedings of the 33rd Northwest Fish Culture Workshop (Informal Records of Presentation) 257-264
Fessler J R Aho G Concannon and J Zakel 1977 An ecological and fish cultural study of Deschutes River
salmonids Oregon Dep of Fish and Wildl Portland OR 48p (Annual Progress Report)
Fessler J R Aho G Concannon J Ziller and S Pribyl 1978 An ecological and fish cultural study of Deschutes River
salmonids and an evaluation of the spring chinook rearing program at Round Butte Hatchery Oregon Dep of Fish and Wildl Portland OR 52 p (Annual Progress Report)
Hansen Harold L 1982 Bonneville Hatchery evaluation Oregon Dep of Fish and Wildl
Portland OR 21 p (Annual Progress Report)
218
Hansen H and S Cramer 1980 Bonneville Hatchery evaluation Oregon Dep of Fish and Wildl
Portland OR 24 p (Annual Progress Report)
Hansen H and E J Martin 1979 Bonneville Hatchery evaluation Oregon Dep of Fish and Wildl
Portland OR 22 p (ODFW Annual Progress Report)
Harmon J R and E Slatick 1983 Use of fish transportation barge for increasing returns of
steelhead imprinted for homing US Dep Commer Natl Oceanic Atmos Admin Natl Mar Fish Serv Northwest and Alaska Fish Cent Seattle WA 13 p plus Appendix (Report to Bonneville Power Admin Portland OR Contract DE-Al79-82BP34735)
Harmon J R and E Slatick 1984 Use of fish transportation barge for increasing returns of
steelhead imprinted for homing 1983 US Dep of Commer Natl Oceanic Atmos Admin Natl Mar Fish Serv Northwest and Alaska Fish Cent Seattle WA 17 p (Report to Bonneville Power Admin Portland OR Contract DE-Al79-83BP39643)
Holway J E 1982 Eagle Creek NFH density study progress report Proceedings of the
33rd Northwest Fish Culture Workshop (Informal Records of Presentation)195-202
Johnson S L 1982 A review and evaluation of release strategies for hatchery
reared coho salmon Oregon Dep of Fish and Wildl Portland OR 47 p (Report 82-5)
Knox W J M W Flesher R B Lindsay and L S Lutz 1984 Spring chinook studies in the John Day River Oregon Dep of Fish
and Wildl Portland OR 27 p (Annual Report to Bonneville Power Administration Portland Oregon Project No 79-4)
Krcma R M Gessel L Gilbreath B Monk s Mccutcheon and W Muir 1984 Evaluation of juvenile collection system at Bonneville Dam 1983
US Dep Commer Natl Oceanic Atmos Admin Natl Mar Fish Serv Northwest and Alaska Fish Cent Seattle WA 67 p (Report to the US Army Corps of Engineers Portland OR Contract DACWS7-83-F-0315)
Ledgerwood R L and E M Dawley 1982 Stomach fullness of individual stocks of salmonid smolts entering
the Columbia River estuary during 1979 80 and 81 Proceedings of the 33rd Northwest Fish Culture Workshop (Informal Records of Presentation)265-278
219
Loch J 1982 Juvenile and adult steelhead and sea run cutthroat trout within
the Columbia River estuary Wash Dep of Game Fish Management Div Olympia WA 47p (Report to Natl Mar Fish Serv Seattle WA
Mahnken C V W E F Prentice W Waknitz G E Monan C W Sims and J Williams
1982 The application of recent smoltification research to public hatchery releases an assessment of sizetime requirements for Columbia River hatchery coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch Aquaculture 28251-268
McConnell R J and W D Muir 1982 Preliminary evaluation of the Bonneville juvenile bypass
system-second powerhouse US Dep Commer Natl Oceanic Atmos Adm in Na t1 Mar Fish Serv Northwest and Alaska Fish Cent Seattle WA 8 p ( Final Report to the US Army Corps of Engineers Portland OR Contract DACW57-82-F-0398
Prentice E F C V W Mahnken W S Zaugg F W Waknitz K X Gores A J Novotny L W Harrell J L Mighell L C Folmar W W Dickhoff T A Flagg and L S Smith
1979 A study to assess status of smoltification and fitness for ocean survival of chinook coho and s teelhead US Dep Commer Na t1 Oceanic Atmos Admin Na t1 Mar Fish Serv Northwest and Alaska Fish Cent Seattle WA 36 p plus appendixes (Annual Report to Pacific Northwest Regional Council Portland OR
Prentice E F C V W Mahnken K X Gores F W Waknitz W S Zaugg L C Folmar R King J L Mighell W W Dickhoff T A Flagg L W Harrell A J Novotny D M Damkaer E Wold and R Vreeland
1980 A study to assess status of smoltification and fitness for ocean survival of chinook and coho salmon and steelhead US Dep Commer Natl Oceanic Atmos Admin Natl Mar Fish Serv Northwest and Alaska Fish Cent Seattle WA 44 p plus appendixes (Annual Report to Pacific Northwest Regional Council Portland OR
Prentice E F C V W Mahnken W S Zaugg L C Folmar W W Dickhoff F W Waknitz K X Gores L W Harrell A J Novotny T A Flagg C Safsten and J L Mighell
1981 Assessment of smoltification and fitness for ocean survival (quality of chinook and coho salmon and steelhead in the Columbia River and Puget Sound hatcheries US Dep Commer Natl Oceanic Atmos Admin Natl Mar Fish Serv Northwest and Alaska Fish Cent Seattle WA 13 p plus appendixes (Annual Report to Pacific Northwest Regional Council Portland OR
Slatick E L G Gilbreath and K A Walch 1980 Imprinting salmon and steelhead trout for homing 1979 US Dep
Commer Na t1 Oceanic Atmos Admin Na t1 Mar Fish Serv Northwest and Alaska Fish Cent Seattle WA 38 p (Report to Bonneville Power Admin Portland OR Contract DE-A179-79-BP10682
220
Slatick E L G Gilbreath and K A Walch 1981 Imprinting salmon and steelhead trout for homing 1980 US
Dep Commer Natl Oceanic Atmos Admin Natl Mar Fish Serv Northwest and Alaska Fish Cent Seattle WA 54 p plus appendixes (Report to Bonneville Power Admin Portland OR Contract DE-A179-80-BP-18236)
Slatick E L G Gilbreath J R Harmon and Kmiddot A Walch 1982 Imprinting salmon and steelhead trout for homing 1981 US
Dep Commer Natl Oceanic Atmos Admin Natl Mar Fish Serv Northwest and Alaska Fish Cent Seattle WA 52 p plus appendixes (Report to Bonneville Power Admin Portland OR Contract DE-Al79-81-BP-27891)
Slatick E L G Gilbreath and J R Harmon 1983 Imprinting salmon and steelhead trout for homing 1982 US Dep
Commer Natl Oceanic Atmos Admin Natl Mar Fish Serv Northwest and Alaska Fish Cent Seattle WA 46 p plus Appendix (Report to Bonneville Power Admin Portland OR Contract DE-Al79-81-BP-27891-M001)
Slatick E L G Gilbreath J R Harmon C S Mccutcheon T C Bjornn and R R Ringe
1983 Imprinting salmon and steelhead trout for homing 1983 US Dep Commer Natl Oceanic Atmos Admin Natl Mar Fish Serv Northwest and Alaska Fish Cent Seattle WA 107 p (Report to Bonneville Power Admin Portland OR Contract DE-A179-82-BP39646)
Smith E 1979 Improving survival of spring chinook hatchery smolts in the
Willamette River Oregon Dep Fish and Wildl Portland OR 23 p (Annual Progress Report)
Smith E 1979 Willamette River spring chinook evaluation and Marion Forks
Hatchery evaluation and McKenzie River hatchery evaluation Oregon Dep Fish and Wildl Portland OR 23 p (Annual Progress Report)
Smith E and J Zakel 1980 Willamette River spring chinook evaluation and improving survival
of spring chinook smolts from Willamette River Hatchery and Marion Forks Hatchery evaluation and McKenzie River Hatchery evaluation Oregon Dep Fish and Wildl 53 p (Annual Progress Report)
Vreeland R 1981 An evaluation of the contribution of chinook salmon reared at
Columbia River hatcheries to the Pacific salmon fisheries US Dep Commer middotNatl Oceanic Atmos Admin Natl Mar Fish Serv Environ and Tech Serv Div Portland OR (Report to Bonneville Power Admin Portland OR)
221
Washington P M 1982 Analysis of factors affecting the production of coho salmon
(Oncorhynchus kisutch) in the Columbia River University of Washington Seattle WA PhD Thesis 228 p
Washington P M 1982 The influence of the size of juvenile coho salmon (Oncorhynchus
kisutch) on seaward migration and survival _ (EL Brannon and E o Salo eds) Proceedings of the salmon trout migratory behaviorsymposium University of Washington Seattle WA June 1981pp 146-152
Zaugg ws
1981 Relationships between smolt indicies and migration in controlled and natural environments In (E L Brannonand E O Salo eds) Proceedings of the salmon and trout migratory behavior symposium University of Washington Fisheries Research Institute Seattle WA June 1981
Zaugg W S 1982 Some changes in smoltification and seawater adaptability of
salmonids resulting from environmental and other factors Aquaculture 28 143-151
UNPUBLISHED PROJECTS
Fisher J Comparison of coho scale patterns to those of juveniles captured in the ocean and returning adults Oregon State University Biology Dep Corvallis OR
Hemmingsen A Affects of variation of release date upon returns of coho Oregon Dep Fish and Wildl Corvallis OR
Hopley w
Alteration of release schedule for fall chinook salmon from Kalama Falls Hatchery Wash Dep of Fish Olympia WA
Lincoln R Estimation of coho populations in the ocean Wash Dep of Fish Olympia WA
Ma thews s
Comparison of forklengths of coho salmon at release to those of survivors at Jones Beach University of Washington School of Fisheries Seattle WA
222
Mcisaac D
Outmigration timing for North Lewis River wild chinook 1978 through 1981 Wash Dep of Fish Battle Ground WA
Murphy s
Comparison of juvenile coho scales to those of returning adults and fishery recoveries Oregon Dep Fish and Wildl Corvallis OR
Norman G
Estimation of fall chinook populations in the ocean Wash Dep of Fish Battle Ground WA
Norman G Estimates of abundance for adult sockeye salmon two years following outmigration Wash Dep of Fish Battle Ground WA
Roler Ronald
Adult run forecast of Cowlitz River spring chinook in 1982 Wash Dep of Fish Battle Ground WA
Zaugg W s E F Prentice and F W Waknitz Importance of river migration to the development of seawater tolerance in anadromous salmonids Natl Mar Fish Serv Cook WA Manuscript in preparation 1984
Zaugg W s J Bodle and E Wold Production of O-age spring chinook salmon smolts at the Little White Salmon National Fish Hatchery Natl Mar Fish Serv Cook WA Manuscript in preparation 1984
223
APPENDIX B
Miscellaneous Tables Relating to Migration of Juvenile Salmonids
Appendix Table Bl--Number and percent recovery of juveniles at Jones Beach and adults from mark groups which were identified as replicates or near replicates and used to empirically define sampling variability
Appendix Table B2--Mean stomach fullness and standard deviation for juvenile salmonids captured in purse and beach seines at Jones Beach by 3-day intervals 1980
Appendix Table B3--Mean stomach fullness and standard deviation for juvenile salmonids captured in purse and beach seines at Jones Beach by 3-day intervals 1981
Appendix Table B4--Mean stomach fullness and standard deviation for juvenile salmonids captured in purse and beach seines at Jones Beach by 3-day intervals 1982
Appendix Table B5--Mean stomach fullness and standard deviation for juvenile salmonids captured in purse and beach seines at Jones Beach by 3-day intervals 1983
Appendix Table B6--Status of juvenile salmonid stomachs collected at Jones Beach (RKm 75) 1979-1983
Appendix Table B7--Source date of median recovery and tag codes for fish groups used in graphic comparison of stomach fullness (Figures 44 45 46 47 and 48) Subyearling and yearling chinook salmon coho salmon and steelhead groups captured at Jones Beach in 1982 and 1983
Appendix Table B8--Taxonomic classifications and codes for food items found in juvenile salmonids from the lower Columbia River and near-shore marine waters
224
Appendix Table Bl -Nu11ber ond percent recovery of juveniles ot Jones Beach ond adults fro11 Mrk ro1JpS Which Were identified QS replicates Or near replicates and
--r1aFK-tir Cloe Br Rot) ltAgD1D2)
072727 072728
072729 072730
051142 051143
051144
051145
RD U 3 RD U 1
LD U 3 LD U 1
072328 072830 072331 072832 072833 072834
072363 072546
072548 072545
632450 632603
632505 632506
632613 632614 632615 632616 632617
632618 632619 632620 632621 632622
632623
632624 632625 632626 632627
used o empirically define saffipling variability
REPLICATE GROUPS 1983
Rele11se Infor9j2n Juvenile catch at
Site Date Jones Beach c (source) f Number (domoyr) (no)
--------------------------
Bonn H11t
Spring Cr H1t
Bonn Dll11 (Sp Cr Hat)
Willo111 River (Stayton Pd)
Bonn Hat
Cowlitz Hot
Cowlitz Hat
Subreorling chinook s111on
50000 04H11y83 50800
52600 47400
49700 28Apr83 51300
51700 52100
51400 02-03Kay8353200
53900 52800
28900 26Apr-19Hoy83 24000 26000 26200 24800 26800
Jr9 chinook s1119D
45900 OlNov82 51600
50700 48600
8300 01Sep82 51200
73000 04Apr83 77500
Coho salaon
10900 03Hoy83 10400 10400 10700 10000
10000 10200 10100 10300 10500
10600 10200 10300 10600 10400
82 90
85 86
65 71
82 89
89 100
107 107
17 24 19 15 36 16
123 123
107 107
1 15 18 26
19
11 26 16 12
8 B
19 16 21
24 11 14 7 15
225
( i)
0164 0177
0162 0101
0131 0130
0159 0171
0173 0188
0198 0203
0059 0100 0074 0057 0150 0060
0268e 0238j
0211e 0220j
0012e 002fI
0025 0034
0174 0106 o2so0150 0120
0080 0078 0188 0155 0200
0226 0108 0136 0066 0144
Adult Recoveries d
(nod ()
Appendix Table Bl--continued
Coho sah1on
632628 Cowlitz Hat 10200 03Hay83 19 0186 632629 10300 16 015S 632630 10400 17 0163 632631 10200 17 0167 632632 10600 17 0160
632633 10500 21 0200 632634 10100 22 0218 632635 10600 11 0104 632636 10400 16 0154 632637 10500 10 0095
632638 10500 17 0162 632639 10100 16 0158 632640 10200 15 0147 632641 10000 13 0130 632642 10700 19 0178
051133 Eagle Cr Hat 60500 04Hay83 78 0129 051134 62800 76 0121 051135 40900 45 0110 051136 39300 65 0165
051137 20900 32 0153 051138 20300 36 0177
072731 Sandy Hat 54700 29Apr83 32 0059 072736 54900 46 0084
072732 54900 34 0062 072735 54600 33 0060
072733 54100 36 0066 072734 54700 37 0068
632651 Washougal Hot 8000 27May83 7 0087 632652 7900 3 0038 632653 8000 4 ooso 632654 8000 7 0087 632655 7900 8 0101
632657 9700 7 0072 632658 9900 6 0061 632659 9800 4 0041 632660 9700 7 0072
632661 9900 5 0050 632662 9900 5 ooso 632663 9900 10 0101 632701 9700 3 0031 632702 10000 7 0070
632703 10100 7 0069 632704 10400 7 0067 632705 10100 10 0099 632706 10600 5 0047 632707 10100 3 0030
632708 10400 3 0029 632709 10300 9 0087 632710 10400 8 0077 632711 10400 5 0048 63i2712 10500 7 0067
632713 10000 7 0070 632714 10900 8 0073 632715 10300 8 0078 632716 10300 3 0029 632717 10600 12 0113
226
Appendix Table Bl--continued
Coho sobon
050928 Willard H11t 22600 07Jun83 22 0097 050929 22200 20 0090 050930 21900 18 0082 050931 22500 14 0062 OS0942 23300 21 0090 050943 22800 17 0075
050932 23300 16 0069 050933 20800 16 0077 050938 22200 19 0085 050939 21900 23 0105 050940 20500 17 0083 050941 23000 32 0139
050934 23700 19 0080 050935 22100 13 0059 050936 22700 23 0101 050937 22200 15 0067 050944 23200 23 0099 050945 23300 18 0077
teelhead
6328391 Lyons Ferry Hat 33000 09-13Hay83 96 0291 RAS 1
6328401 32000 7B 0244 RA S 2
RD KE 2 WhR FallsRndButte 1000 01Jun83 1 0100 RD KE 3 1000 06Jbullin83 1 0100
227
Appendix Table Bl--continued
REPLICATE GROUPS 1982
Release Inforirotion Juvenile catch --ffarK a7
_________
ltLoe Br Rot) Site ltAgD1D2) (source)
051058 051059
nbernathy SCDC
072414 Bonn Hot 072415
072416 072417
LDT 1 Bonn Ori H11t RD T 1 ltBonn Hotgt
LDT 2 RD T 2
--
ot Date Jones Beach c
Humber (do10yr) rnor---m--
Subyftorlin9fhinook s11lon
90600 20Apr-01 Jun82 9329700 34
51600 04Jun82 34 52400 50
52500 45 54100 46
51800 221 54400 199
52900 215 49800 159
0103 0114
0066 0095
0086 0085
0427
0366
0406 0319
0504i35 LitWhSalHat 101300 02-03Jun82 121 0119 050436
072330 Oxbow Hot 072411
050851 Spring Cr Hat 051057
051053 Spring Cr Hat 051054
051055 051056
632309 Cowlitz Hat 632310
632311 632134
072525 N Santiani R 072526 (Marion Fks Hat 072527
072528 072529 072530
1024121 SFK Si1loon R RD SU 4 ltMcCall Hat)
102413amp RD SU 2
072429 Ct1scade H11t 072433
632420 Cowlitz H1t 632421 632422 632423 632424
632425 632426 632427 632428 632429
98400
52300 04-25Jun8252500
46700 08-13Apr82102300
43100 lSApr82 48500
41200 48200
Ye4rlin9_fhinook salon
23900 OlApr82 23200
24300 24000
50600 17Mor82 50600 49500
50000 18-22Har8249400 49200
40700 08-10Apr82
40500
Coho sahian
27700 25May82 28200
9700 03May82 9800 10300 10200 10100
10500 10400 10400 10500 10400
146
45 46
48 105
68 71
71 64
16 6
10 9
12 13 26
14 22 20
16
25
25 30
18 15 25 18 19
13 15 15 18 11
228
0148
0086 0088
0103 0103
0157 0146
0172 0133
0067 0026
0045 0038
0024 0026 0053
0028 0044 0041
0039
0062
0090 0106
0184 0154 0240 0175 0188
0124 0143 0144 0 171 0106
Adult Recoveries d ltnor-----mmiddot-
7 0008 2 0007
0 0000 0 0000
0 0000 0 0000
0 0000 0 0000
0 0000 0 0000
8 0017 10 0010
J 0007 12 0025
8 0019 7 0014
18 0075 30 0129
11 0045 20 0083
0 0000 0 0000 0 0000
1 0002 0 0000 2 0004
fl
ti
111 0401 121 0429
89 0908 77 0778 93 0894 85 0825 103 1020
145 1381 110 1048 114 1096 106 1010 116 1115
Appendix Table Bl--continued
Coho sollion
632430 Cowlitz Hat 10500 03Hoy82 17 0160 97 0915 632431 10500 13 0123 102 0962 632432 10100 16 0157 92 0902 632433 10400 17 0163 100 0962 632434 10400 1B 0171 83 0190
632435 10300 18 0175 98 0951 632436 10300 20 0194 122 1184 632437 10100 17 0168 101 1000 632438 10200 20 0196 119 1167 632439 10300 17 0165 115 1117
632440 10500 24 0226 138 1302 632441 10600 16 0150 133 1243 632442 10600 17 middot 0159 133 1243 632443 10400 22 0210 145 1381 632444 10700 0206 122 1140
632445 10200 16 0155 140 1359 632446 10300 21 0202 136 1308 632447 10500 24 0226 122 1151 632448 10200 15 0146 113 1097 632449 10000 19 0188 105 1040
051035 Eagle Cr Hat 20000 06H11y82 29 0145 159 0795 051036 19100 42 0220 119 0623
051037 42600 68 0160 250 0587 051038 42400 77 0182 257 0606
051039 68200 114 0167 3B7 0567 051040 66600 115 0173 379 0569
072549 Sandy Hat 23900 30Apr82 31 0129 361 1504 072557 28100 43 0153 398 1416
072550 I 26400 50 0189 396 1soo
072558 27800 36 0129 378 1355
072554 27600 46 0167 345 1250 072551 27200 34 0125 372 1363
072555 28200 33 0117 411 1452 072553 25900 25 0096 315 1212
072556 27600 43 0156 336 1217 072552 26800 36 0134 407 1513
632513 Washougal Hat 10100 25H11y82 9 0088 42 0412 632514 9800 9 0091 33 0333 632515 10200 14 0136 29 0282 632516 9900 6 0061 35 0354 632517 9800 6 0061 44 0449
632518 10100 6 0059 38 0376 632519 10100 8 0079 39 0386 632520 10000 4 0040 37 0366 632521 10200 4 0039 43 0422 632522 10200 12 0117 37 0359
632523 10100 7 0069 59 0578 632524 10000 4 0040 38 0376 632525 10100 5 0050 66 0653 632526 10100 7 0069 30 0294 632527 10000 9 0089 51 osos
229
Appendix Table Bl--continued
Coho sQlmon
632528 Washougal Hot 10100 25May82 9 0009 61 0604 632529 10100 12 0118 42 0412 632530 10100 10 0099 60 0594 632531 10000 4 0040 47 0470 632532 9900 3 0030 58 0586
632533 9600 8 0082 26 0268 632534 9600 9 0094 39 0406 632535 9600 5 0052 40 0412 632536 9500 7 0073 30 0313 632537 9600 11 0113 35 0361
632538 8000 8 0100 22 0275 632539 7900 8 0101 47 0595 632540 8100 2 002s 30 0370 632541 8100 4 0049 37 0457 632542 7900 7 0088 31 0388
JJJld
102404 P11hsi1r1eroi R 40100 09Apri82 56 0131 160 0398 102450 ltNiogQrQ SprHat) 40500 47 0116 144 0356
230
Appendix Table Bl--continued bull REPLICATE GROUPS 1981
Release Inform1tion Juvenile catch -c
MorK o7 ______ _______________ at
( Loe Br ff otgt CAgD1D2)
050744 050745
072341 072342
072343 072344 072345 072346 050747 050849 050850 050743 050746
050740 050748 050750 050751
050741 050749
102221 102222 100519 102219 102220 072247 072248
072251 072250 072249
072253 072252
072218 072221 102236 102237 102238
072255 072257 072256 072258 072259 072262
072260 072263
Site Date Jones Beach c ltsource) 1J Number (domoyr) rnar---rn--
y9y9rJiDLfhinook sl9DAber0t1thy SCDC 22300 15-26Apr81
74100
Bonn Hat 50800 12Hoy81 51600
53200 51800 51000 50800
LitWhSlHot 183400 04-05Jun8152400 i3300
Rock Creek 25700 21-22Apr81(Spring Cr Hot) 150500
Spring Cr Hot 104600 25tfar81 28800 13700 15300
76700 30900
15Apr81
YearliQg_chinook salmon Leamphi R 50000 ltHayden Fd) 51 oooKooskia Hot 17900
37iOO 38600
N Si1ntiilnr R 49900 (Marion Fks Hot) 49900
47100 49600 50200
42200 39600
McKenzieLeaburg 32300 (McKenzie Hot) 37900 Ropid R Hot 49000
44200 51900
Sandy Hat 27600 28900
27300 28000 29800 27700
28100 29600
OBApr81
07Apr81
08Apr81 05Hov80 06-07NovBO
16-23ifor8117-20lfo r8118-20liilr81
16-24ffar8123-24lfo r81
05Nov81
12Apr81
Coho s11l11on
01Hoy81
231
11 0049 4B 0065
45 0089 45 0087
59 0111 55 0106 41 ooao
5B 0114 117 0064
43 0082 4 0030
10 0039 56 0037
63 0060 12 0042 9 0065 8 0052
78 0102 35 0113
7 0014 7 0014 2 0011 3 0008 4 0010 4 0008 5 0010
7 0015 7 0014 10 0020
10 0024 10 0025
1 0003 4 0011
3 0007 7 OOll
10 0019
21 0076 16 0055 20 0073 12 0043 34 0114 25 0090
17 0061 18 0061
Adult Recoveries d ltnor-----crr-
87 0389 260 0351
37 0073 24 0047
30 0056 59 0114
10 0020 32 0063
12 0007 1 0002 1 0007
50 0194 311 0207
42 0040 8 0028 1 0001 6 0039
54 0070 25 0081
10 0020 4 0008 0 0000 2 0005 1 0003
8 0016 11 0022
22 0047 20 0040 24 0048
27 0064 34 0086
23 0071 17 0045
f_ 2 0005 1 0002
363 1313 387 1337 371 1358 364 1298
535 1792 501 1803 442 1573 485 1636
Appendix Table Bl--continued
Coho salmon
072261 Sandy Hat 29700 01May81 20 0067 451 1515 072301 28800 22 0076 454 1571
072127 Tanner Creek 24900 06tloy81 24 0096 510 2047 072130 (Cascade Hiltgt 26600 28 010s 488 1828
072128 27900 08Jun81 21 0075 1017 3644 072131 26000 25 0096 752 2883
072129 27700 06JJJl81 13 0047 811 2925 072132 28900 19 0066 644 2225
RA IY 1 Rock Isfond 5000 24Hay81 2 0041 RA IY 2 (Turtle Rock Pdgt 4900 25Hoy81 1 0021
LA IY 1 5000 27May81 2 oo4o
LA IY 2 4900 28HAy81 1 0021
LA IM 2 1000 01Jun81 1 0101 LA IH 4 1000 1 0101
632150 IJoshougol Hot 51700 30Apr81 45 0087 366 0707 632202 51900 46 0009 226 0435
Steelheod
LA P 2 Clarkston 1700 01May81 3 017s LAS 1 (Lobull GMni te DANgt 2200 3 0137
LAP 3 5500 05-09tfoy81 10 0101 LAS 2 6800 13 0191
232
Appendix Table Bl--continued
REPLICATE GROUPS 1980
Reletlse Information Juvenile catch -- ffo rK 17 _____ --------------
at Adult ( Loe Br ffot) Site D1te Jones Beach c Recoveries d (AgIt1D2) ( source) bj Number (domoyr) rnar---rrr-- lt nor-----rir
Subleorling chinook salrion
072133 Bonn H1t 50400 27lfay80 12 0024 17 0034 072134 49900 14 002s 24 0048
072135 48000 24 ooso 10 0021
072136 49400 26 0053 21 0043
072162 Sku1anio Lt 50100 27-28lfoy80 21 0042 21 0042 072163 lt0gtbow Hat) 53000 20 0038 32 0060
050648 DS Bonn D1 99500 19Hay80 40 0040 1091 1096 0506i49 (Spring Cr Hot 99700 31 0031 1021 1024
Yeorlinvhinook s1lrion
1021i2 Lmhi R 40100 01-03flpr80 2 0005 18 0045 102126 (Hoyden Cr Pd) 41100 03-04AprBO 4 0010 11 0027
LO IL 2 Methow Rllo 15000 05ffay80 5 0034 RD IL 2 (Leavenworth Hotgt 13800 2 0015
LD F 1 16400 10Jfoy80 6 0037 RD F 1 15200 2 0014
LD IY 1 15200 13Hay80 7 0046 middot RD IY 1 13300 1 0008
LA PI 2 Icicle Creek 32900 27Hay80 6 0019 LA PI 4 (Leavenworht Hat) 33000 01May80 4 0013 LA PI 1 32700 24Apr80 4 0013
LD IL 3 Pr Ropid 15200 20Hay80 5 0033 RD IL 3 (Leavenworth Hot) 14700 4 0028
LD F 2 16200 22May80 3 0019 RD F 2 15400 13 0084
LD IY 2 15200 27May80 16 0105 RD IY 2 13200 7 0053
LA PP 1amp Wh Bluffs 32600 24Apr80 13 0040 LA S 1 amp (Le1venworth Hat) 35400 16 0046
LD IL 1 Richland 15900 22Hay80 4 0026 RD IL 1 (Leavenworth H1t 13600 6 0044
LD F 3 16200 26May80 6 0037 RD F 3 15800 8 0051
LD IY 3 15400 29May80 10 0065 RD IY 3 13900 6 0044
RA 9 1 Italton Pt 32400 24Apr80 14 0044 RA IK 1 (leovenworth Hat) 32900 22 0068
RA 9 2 32700 27Apr80 15 0047 RA IK 2 32800 29 0090
RA IK 3 amp 32600 01May80 34 0101 035402 32600 34 0101
RA 9 3 32400 27 0084
072043 Dexter 31300 OSNov79 5 0016 34 0109 072045 ltOakridge Hat) 30800 6 0019 41 0133
072042 30700 10-11Mar80 20 0065 294 0957 072044 30700 10Har80 25 0001 265 0862
233
Appendix Table Bl--continued
Ye 11rliQ4 chinook salmon
071949 Deschutes R 28100 14Apr80 15 oosJ 0 0000 071950 (Rnd Butte Hotgt 29900 8 0027 2 0007 071951 29100 14-15npr80 7 0024 5 0017
072018 DS WillQm Falls 34700 05-06tfoy 79 3 0009 5 0014 072019 (S SontiaD Hat) 35000 4 0011 6 0011
072020 Foster 33000 2 0006 10 0030 072021 (S Santiam Hatgt 34800 1 0003 2B 0080
Coho s1ltol
072031 S11ndy Hat 25100 01Hoy80 16 0064 216 0858 072033 25100 15 0060 152 0604
072032 25500 16 0063 259 1014 072034 25200 17 0067 276 1095
072035 25700 12 0046 264 1019 072036 24400 20 0082 285 1163
072037 26000 13 0050 377 1448 072038 26400 20 0076 29B 1126
LD 52 1 Rocky Reach Res 24100 13Nay80 7 0029 RD 52 1 ltTurtle R Pdgt 24100 5 0021
LD 52 2 Rocky Reach Tail 25400 10 0040 RD 52 2 ltTurtle R Pdgt 22400 5 0023
LD IX 2 Rocky Reach Res 27100 16Hiy80 5 0019 RI1 IX 2 ltTurtle R Pd) 24800 2 0009
LD IH 2 24900 19May80 8 0033 RD iH 2 27200 3 0012
LD IH 3 Rocky Reach Tail 27900 4 0015 RD IH 3 ltTurtle R Pd) 25400 6 0024
632039 W1shoug11l Hot 99600 08Moy80 82 0082 683 0686 632040 98600 68 0069 686 0696
632037 97200 09J1Jn80 53 0054 2393 2462 63203B 97800 65 0066 2267 2318
631954 106700 07Jul80 126 0118 4556 4270 631955 106900 118 0110 4430 4144
050359 lit Wh Sol R 42300 23May80 12 0028 137 0323 050654 ltWillard Hatgt 51500 6 0012 158 0307
050660 DS Bonn bull D1111 33700 24Hay80 3 0009 74 0219 050650 ltWillard Hat) 47900 25Hay80 B 0017 119 0240 050655 51400 18 0035 123 0239
Steel h ead
RD X3 1 Pahsimeroi R 5400 04Feb-27Apr80 1 0019 LA SU 1 ltDworshok H1t) 5000 23-27Apr80 1 0020
RD IU 2 Lemhi R 10500 22Apr80 2 0019 LA SU 4 ltDworsh1k Htlt) 10100 24Apr80 2 0020
LA X3 3 Dworshok Hot 10100 29Apr80 2 0020 RA DT 3 9900 2 0021
102156 Pahsi1t1eroi 49900 06-16Apr80 26 0052 241 0483 102157 ltHiagra Sp H1t gt 50300 07-17Apr80 31 0062 207 0411
LD Y 1 Wells D Res 13400 01Moy80 1 oooeRD Y 1 (Wells Spw Ch) 13000 1 0008
234
Appendix Table Bl--continued
Steelhead
LOY 3 Uells D foil 13000 2 0016 RD Y 3 (Wells Spw Ch) 12200 1 0009
LD K 3 Yells D Res 14300 03Hay80 1 0007 Rk K 3 (Wells Spw Ch) 13600 1 0008
LOK 2 Wells D foil 13100 2 0016 RD K 2 (Wells Spw Ch) 13800 1 0008
LD IJ 3 Wells n Res 13100 OSHoy80 1 oooaRD IJ 3 (Wells Spw Ch) 11200 1 0009
235
Appendix Table B1--continued
-ffark a( Loe Br ffot) (AgIllD2gt
LO IC 1 LD IC 2 LD IC 3
LD IF 1 LD IF 2 LD IF 3 LD IK 1 LD IK 2 LD IK 3 LD PI 1 LD P 2 LD PI 3
RD IC 1 RD IC 2 RD IC 3
RD PI 1 RD PI 2 RII fI 3
RD IF 1 RD IF 2 RD IF 3 RD IK 1 RD IK 2 RD IK 3 035501 03560i 035701
050434 050444
071626 071917 071918
631817 631818
100415 100424
071747 071748
LD IH 1 RD IZ 4 LD IZ 1 RK IZ 2
RD IH 1 RD IZ 1
LD IZ 2 RK IZ 3
REPLICATE GROUPS 1979
ftlll Information Juvenile catch
Site ( sourcegt bj
John Doy D (Spring Cr Hat)
Big Wh fd (Spring Cr Hatgt
Sp ring Cr Hilt
Hill Creek ltBonn H1t)
Cowlitz Sal HQt
Rapid R (Dworshok Hot )
Elt1gle Creek Hot
Vont11ge Bride(leQvenworth ot)
W11napura D (Leavenworth Hot)
11t Date Jones leach c
Number (domoyr) r nor---rrr--
Subyf11rlin9 chinook s1lron
20000 06Jun79 29 20400 21 19800 20
19600 05Jun79 19 20100 6
20200 15
19500 17 19500 10 19SOO 19 21200 06Jun79 17 20200 24 19600
li
24800 26 20000 19 20200 21
20100 30 20300 23 20100 21
20100 05Jun79 16 20100 18 19700 23
21500 30 20700 33 19000 28
28500 26Jun79 25 34700 17 36300 11
95500 20Apr79 196 135500 281
Jrling chjnook solmon
51500 08-09Nov78 9 48200 10 51100 B
24000 23Apr79 35 24300 34
127000 15Har-15Apr79 30 122000 48
46200 01Mor79 39 48200 50
49800 11Hoy79 85 55900 94
62600 12Hay79 95 50000 94
38400 13Hoy79 92 49000 101
52400 14Hay79 83 62500 100
236
0146 0103 0101
0097 0030 0074 0087 0052 0098 0081 0119 0113
0106 0095 0105
0150 0114 0105
0080 0090 0117 0140 0160 0148 0088 0049 0030
0206 0208
o017eo02C0016
0146 0140
0024 0039
0084 0104
0172 0168 0152 0189
0240 0208
0159 0160
Adult Recoveries d lt nor-----rr
1 0004 2 0006 0 0000
fl
11
23 0045 20 0041 27 0053
833 3471 636 2617
115 0091 107 0088
29 0063 51 0106
Appendix Table Bl--continued bull
Yearling chinook salmon
071725 N Santiu 49600 03-05Apr79 32 0064 17 0034 071726 (Harian Fks HQt) 49600 21 0042 18 0036 071729 44_900 37 OOP2 22 0049
071926 S Santia1r1 Hat 31500 07Nov78 4 0013e 64 0203 071927 32700 1 ooor 43 0131
071929 DS Willam Falls 32600 6 0018e 68 0208 071930 (S SantiQm Hat) 32800 12 0036j 114 0341
050352 Willard Hat 35500 OlNov78 5 0014e 0 0000 050353 35700 1 000 1 0003 0503511 36900 1 0003 1 0003
050349 Lit Wh Hot 31100 19Apr79 20 0064 20 0064 050350 (Willard Hatgt 31200 12 0038 24 0077 050351 32900 10 0030 30 0091
tQO salmon_
071908 Tanner Creek 27900 07May79 18 0064 144 os15071911 (C11sc1de Hit) 26900 18 0067 169 0627
071907 27100 07Jun79 37 0136 299 1101 071910 25900 32 0123 344 1327
071909 24500 06Jul79 50 0203 192 0781 071912 25100 56 0223 248 0986
631911 Toutle Hat 42400 07Moy79 46 0108 482 1137 631912 34600 40 0115 476 1372
631928 39700 06Jul79 109 0274 400 1008 631929 41100 96 0233 436 1061
631923 Washougol Hat 74300 07May79 81 0109 1022 1374 631924 80600 87 0108 1333 1654
631927 81000 06Jul79 197 0243 1078 1331 631934 82000 191 0233 980 1195
Steel head
LA AN 1amp Icicle Creek 23900 26Apr79 22 0092 108 0451 WHLBYW (Chelon Hat)
LA AN 2amp 19100 14 0073 76 0396 WHLBPK
LA AN 3amp 24100 19 0079 92 0381 WHLBLG
RAY 1 amp DS Bonn Dari 23300 28Apr79 38 0163 92 0394 WHLBtJH (Chelan Haigt
RAY 2 S 24300 21 0086 97 0399 WHLBRD
RAT 4 DS Bonn Dam 20700 17tfoy79 90 0434 RAY 4 ltTucannon H1t) 22000 68 0308
LD P 1 Wells Du 10000 04tfoy79 2 0021 LD P 3 ltWells Spaw Ch) 10000 1 0010
RD P 1 10000 4 0041 RD P 3 9600 2 0021
237
Appendix Table Bl--continued
REPLICATE GROUPS 1978
Release Information --ffarK a7
_____________________ Juvenile catch at
( Loe Br ffotgt Site Date Jones Beach c (AgD1D2gt (sourcegt bj Number (da110yr) rnor---m--
--------------------
111e1irlinq chino9Jl1QD
050343 Lit Wh Hot 49500 050344 51300 OS0345 52100
050346 49800 050347 49400 050348 I 49500
050355 39300 050356 40100 050357 39100
050342 50500 056101 48400 056301 52200
050339 Spring Creek HQt 49900 050340 52000 050341 50500
056001 98100 056201 92300
071708 Upstr Willa Falls 50900 071710 (Stayton Pd) 51100
25May78 96
107 127
114
99 121
12Jul78 15 18 28
24May78 106 117 105
18Aug78 6 7 6
18Apr78 153
175
31Moy78 44
01Jun78 52
Ye1rlin9Shinook S1h1on
631612 Cowlitz Hat 28200 08HQr78 34 631613 27700 27
631709 89400 124 631710 87900 109
631711 58200 77 631712 56900 85
631717 71300 70 631718 69400 64
631601 Klickitat HQt 144800 31Har78 73 631602 146300 76
WHRDLB RAU DS Bonn D1lh 37000 09lfay78 22 WHRDPK RAL2 (Kooskia Hatgt 36900 22 WHRIIYW Rnl3 35400 20 WHRDXY RAL4 37100 15
091661 N Santia1 R 48600 13-14liilr78 17 091662 (Harian Fllts Ht) 45900 22 091663 50200 17
091701 49100 28 091702 49600 22 091703 50000 22
071611 Rnd Butte Hit 46400 3lH1y78 33 071612 46200 34
091627 s Santia11 Hi1t 28700 07Nov77 2 091629 28700 1
091630 DS Willam Fllls 25900 08Nov77 4 091631 (S Santia1 Hat) 29000 3
238
0194 0209 0243
0229 0200 0244
0038 0045 0071
0210 0242 0201
012 013 012
157 191
0086 0102
0122 0097
0139 0125
0132 0149
0098 0092
0051 0053
0059 0060 0056 0040
0035 0048 0034
0058 0046 0044
0072 0074
0007 0003
0015 0010
Adult Recoveries d
(nor-middot--11r
5 0010 3 0006 1 0002
5 0010 4 0008 1 0002
15 0038 11 0027 17 0043
3 0006 8 0017 6 0011
172 0345 231 0444 182 0360
el
it
43 0084 56 0109
1100 3901 1245 4495
2836 3172 2790 3174
2161 3713 2218 3898
2181 3059 2240 3228
fl
fl
1 0002 4 0010 3 0008 3 0000
17 0035 18 0039 18 0036
el
it
j fl
ii
158 0550 164 0571
72 0277 95 0327
Appendix Table B1--continued
091623 091624
LA ID 1
LA ID 2 LA II 3
RA ID 1 RA II 2 RA ID 3
LD IJ 1 LD IJ 2 Lit IJ 3
DS Willom Falls CS Santiab Hat)
John I1i1y liar ltCuson Hatgt
DS Bonn Dall
(Carson Hit)
Yerlif9 chiniook salon
26900 13-14Mar7824600
Coho salmon
31400 09May78 31500 32300
33000 22Hay78 33000 33000
31500 18May78 33100 32300
239
JO 0111 355 1319 25 0102 288 1170
33 0105 37 0119 22 0069
28 0085
17 0053 12 0037
13 0042 17 0053 27 00B5
Appenlix Table B1--continued
--H--a-rk-a--shy
( Loc Br lfot)(AgDlD2)
REPLICATE GOUPS 1977
Release Information
Site (source) I Number
Dote (doraoyr)
Juvenile catch at
Jones Beach c Cno J Ci--
SubyJorling chinook salmon
091612 Upstr Willt11 Ftllls 44600 02-04Apr77 106 091613 (Aursville Pd) 43100 103
0238 0239
091606 DS WilloD Falls 92000 238 0259 0308 0282
091611 (Au1sville Pd) 46400 143 091607 43500 123
054401 Spring Creek Hot 054501
96700 08Apr77 95800
05490lampRD U 1 75800
130911 130912
130914 131104
131301 131304
091602 091601
060514 060601
060515 060603
060602 060604
LA X3 1 RA X3 1
052004 052104
101307 101309
101311 101313
100236 100235
Yeuling chinook st1h1on
Cowlitz Hot 88000 08Hor77 88600
61700 61600
28700 27900
Rnd Butte Hot 29400 02Hoy77 31700
Sandy Hot
Posco (Turtle Rock Pd)
Wilford Hat
DS Bonn 0011 ltDworshak Hat)
Cle11rw1Jter R ltDworshak Hatgt
24800 25800
24400 22800
20100 23400
16600 16600
Coho s1h1on
27Apr77
27Apr77
01Hay77
88300 02-04HQy7793800
sectJJ11fili17000 21Hay77 17300
57200 31100
20-21Apr77
P11hsi111eroi R 55400 05-10Apr77(Niogra Sp Hat) 59300
216 207 215
0223 0216 0284
44 0050 36 0041
31 0050 24 0039
12 0042 12 0043
2 0007 2 0006
8 7
8 6
6
10
3 1
20 21
4 3
7 5
2 5
0032 0027
0033 0026
0030 0043
0019 0001
0023 0024
0024 0017
0017 0016
0004 oooa
Adult Recoveries d lt iror-----c1r
16 19
26 17 17
fl
11 11
904 1104
1078 1052
612 717
0 2
421 341
418 339
382 459
el jl
10 20
52 38
9 9
0036 0044
0028 0037 0039
1027 1246
1747 1708
2132 2570
0000 0006
1691 1321
1708 1483
1897 1960
0059 0116
0 124 0122
0016 0015
Percent of total release calculated from observed recovery o data(-) means either adults have yet to return were not collected or were not obtained from fishery agencies prior to analysis Comparisons between groups released at different times may be erroneous because of differences in ocean distribution unequal fishing effort or sampling effort
11 More complete release information is available in Dawley et al 1985b and from the releasing agency Figure 1 Abbreviations BonnbullBonneville CraCreek DaDam DSbull Downstream FkaFork Hataffatchery LitaLittle Lt0Light LoaLower NaNorth PdaPond1
PraPriest RaRiver ResaReservoir Rnd0Round ssouth Sal0Salmon SpraSpring Strbull Stream SCDCaSalmon Culture Developmental Center TailbullTailrace and Wh0White
poundI Actual catch and percent of number released for beach seine and purse seine combined
Observed recoveries from ocean and river fisheries plus escapement preliminary data
_ Includes fall catch as well as spring catch
I Not used for adult recovery comparison due to probable survival difference in seawater due to treatmnt 240
for juvenile Appendix Table B2--Mean stomach fullness and standard deviation
salmonids captured in purse and beach seines at Jones
Beach by 3-day intervals 1980
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-lYtLilL- _lCiLdriL- Pu1se I Beach
-l-1980 n Hean SD n Hean SD n Hean SD
COHO SIILHON
HflY 5-HAY 7 1 Jo ooo 8 49 113 9 47 122
HflY 8-HflY 10 11 41 1 59 7 46 140 18 4J 149
HAY 11-HAY 13 27 43 1Jo 4 45 191 31 43 135
NAY 14-HAY 16 66 51 100 16 so 110 82 5 bull 1 101
HAY 17-NAY 19 79 40 112 33 41 111 112 41 111 HflY 20-HAY 22 13 3S 127 0 oo ooo 13 35 121
HAY 23-HAY 25 12 J6 131 24 18 151 36 24 168
HflY 26-HAY 28 20 43 134 11 JJ 119 31 J9 136 HflY 29-HAY 31 6 43 137 11 26 121 17 32 149
JUN 1-JUN 3 9 44 113 middot1 20 ooo 10 42 132 JUN 4-JUN 6 8 38 128 2 45 071 10 39 120 JUN 7-JUN 9 2 50 141 0 00 ooo 2 50 141
JUN 10-JUN 12 1 40 000 0 oo ooo 1 40 000
JUN 13-JUN 15 48 43 145 6 45 152middot 54 43 145 JUN 16-JUN 18 39 38 120 23 37 1 21 62 J8 120
JUN 19-JUN 21 2 5 5 071 1 30 000 3 47 153 JUN 22-JUN 24 0 oo 000 0 oo 000 0 00 000 JUN 25-JUN 27 0 oo 000 0 oo 000 0 oo 000
JUN 28-JUN 30 0 oo 000 0 00 000 0 00 ooo
JUL 1-JUL J 0 oo 000 0 00 000 0 00 000
JUL 4-JUL 6 0 oo ooo 0 oo 000 0 oo 000
JUL 7-JUL 9 0 oo ooo 0 00 000 0 oo 000
JUL 10-JUL 12 74 45 089 11 48 075 85 45 088 JUL 13-JUL 15 0 00 ooo 3 37 153 3 37 153
JUL 16-JUL 18 0 oo 000 2 5 bull S 071 2 55 o71JUL 19-JUL 21 0 oo ooo 0 00 000 0 oo oooJUL 22-JUL 24 0 oo 000 0 oo ooo 0 oo ooo
JUL 25-JUL 27 1 JO 000 0 00 000 1 30 000JUL 28-JUL JO 0 oo 000 0 00 ooo 0 oo ooo
YEflRLING CHINOOK SflLHON
HAR 9-HAR 11 0 oo ooo 5 28 084 5 28 084 ttflR 12-HAR 14 0 oo ooo 5 J6 152 5 36 152 HflR 15-HAR 17 1 10 ooo 3 17 115 4 15 100 HiR 18-HAR 20 2 10 000 39 2S 15s 41 24 155 11IR 21-HAR 23 0 00 ooo 10 27 189 10 27 189 HlIR 24-HAR 26 J 20 100 31 25 157 34 2s 1 52 HlIR 27-HAR 29 1 20 000 25 26 158 26 26 155 HiR 30-IIPR 1 2 25 071 20 JO 214 22 29 204 APR 2-APR 4 9 34 167 19 34 154 28 34 155 APR 5-APR 7 8 J6 106 5 34 114 13 Js 10SPR 8-APR 10 21 J8 183 31 J4 133 52 J6 155 flPR 11-APR 13 9 middotJ4 073 6 JJ 103 15 J4 oeJflPR 14-APR 16 44 43 156 20 41 12e 64 42 147flPR 17-flPR 19 28 42 125 J 20 173 31 40 143APR 20-APR 22 18 43 127 8 36 119 26 41 126APR 23-APR 25 17 49 203 8 41 189 25 4 6 199 APR 26-flPR 28 8 5 bull 0 120 2 45 071 10 49 110 flPR 29-HAY 1 19 so 11s s JO 141 24 46 144 HY 2-HflY 4 11 ss o69 0 oo 000 11 ss 069 HAY 5-HflY 7 63 38 140 31 39 119 94 38 133 HY 8-HAY 10 38 44 141 29 39 129 67 42 137 HY 11-HflY 13 6 43 121 1 40 000 7 43 111 HAY 14-HflY 16 3 4J os8 0 oo 000 3 43 058 MY 17-HAY 19 9 36 133 l 10 ooo 10 33 149 HflY 20-HAY 22 0 oo ooo 0 00 ooo 0 oo 000 HY 23-HY 25 4 20 000 0 oo ooo 4 20 000 HAY 26-HflY 28 0 oo ooo 0 oo 000 0 oo oooHflY 29-HflY 31 0 oo ooo 0 oo ooo 0 oo oooJUN 1-JUN 3 0 oo ooo 0 oo ooo 0 00 000JUN 4-JUN 6 1 10 000 1 20 ooo 2 1s 071JUN 7-JUN 9 1 40 ooo 0 oo 000 1 o oooJUN 10-JUN 12 3 1 0 000 0 oo 000 3 10 000 JUN 13-JUN 15 0 00 ooo 0 oo 000 0 oo 000 JUN 16-JUN 18 1 40 ooo 0 00 000 1 40 oooJUN 19-JUN 21 0 oo ooo 0 oo ooo 0 oo 000
241