Salmonid Population and Habitat Monitoring in the Lower Columbia/Columbia Estuary Provinces Oregon...
-
Upload
richard-doyle -
Category
Documents
-
view
221 -
download
3
Transcript of Salmonid Population and Habitat Monitoring in the Lower Columbia/Columbia Estuary Provinces Oregon...
Salmonid Population and Habitat Monitoring in the Lower
Columbia/Columbia Estuary Provinces
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife
ODFW’S PROPOSED LOWER COLUMBIA/COLUMBIA ESTUARY
PROVINCES SALMONID MONITORING PROGRAM
Goal: to provide statistically-rigorous data on the status and trends of salmonid populations and stream/riparian habitats at the ESU and Population Complex scales using the EMAP sampling design
EMAP APPROACH
Provides a statistically-rigorous method to analyze the status and trends in resources
Sample sites are determined by a GIS-based spatially balanced random selection process
Provides a consistent framework to integrate monitoring projects
ODFW’S ESU AND POPULATION COMPLEX-SCALESALMONID MONITORING PROGRAM
Habitat Monitoring Status and trends in habitat quality and quantity
Juvenile Coho and Steelhead Monitoring Status and Trends in juvenile coho abundance and distribution Trends in juvenile steelhead abundance
Adult Spawner Abundance Monitoring Status and trends in abundance and distribution of adult coho
and winter steelhead
Lower Columbia Coho Salmon ESU
Steelhead ESUs in Lower Columbia
S W Washington
Lower Columbia
Task 1: Habitat Monitoring
Key QuestionStatus of Habitat Quantity/Quality?Trends in Habitat Quantity/Quality?Spatial Distribution of habitat quality?Relationships between habitat and land use?
Methods
50 habitat sites
500-1000 m length of survey
Standard ODFW habitat survey protocols
Portion resurveyed for QA/QC
KEY INDICATORS
Pool habitat SedimentWoodRiparianOff-channel habitat
• 100 sites for coho ESU• 50 sites for each steelhead ESU
HABITAT SURVEYSHABITAT SURVEYS
ALL COASTAL STREAMS
REFERENCE DATASET
SEDIMENT
HIGHER THAN REFERENCE
SIMILAR TO REFERENCE0
25
50
75
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
PERCENT GRAVEL IN RIFFLE UNITS
DESIRABLE
0
25
50
75
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
PERCENT FINES IN RIFFLE UNITS
UNDESIRABLE
ALL COASTAL STREAMS
REFERENCE DATASET
INSTREAM WOOD
SIMILAR TO REFERENCE
SIGNIFICANTLY LOWER THAN REFERENCE
0
25
50
75
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
WOOD PIECES
DESIRABLE
0
25
50
75
100
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
KEY WOOD PIECES
DESIRABLE
0
25
50
75
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
Percent gravel in riffle units
North Coast
Mid-Coast
Mid-South Coast
Umpqua
South Coast
Comparison of Habitat Features Across Geographic Regions
Geology Volcanic Sedimentary Other
% fine substrate in riffle units 0-10 31-40 11-20 41-50 21-30
N
Task 2: Juvenile Monitoring
Key QuestionsPopulation Status (coho)?Population Trends?Spatial and Temporal Distribution?Relationship to Parental Spawner Abundance?
Juvenile Salmonid Monitoring Approach
• Snorkel Surveys
• 1 km sample reaches
• 10-20% of sites resurveyed for QA/QC
• 100 sites for coho ESU• 50 sites for each steelhead ESU
JUVENILE SURVEYSJUVENILE SURVEYS
SpawningRearing and MigrationMigration
Number of Juvenile Coho Observed During Original Survey
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70Num
ber
of J
uven
ile C
oho
Obs
erve
d D
urin
g R
esur
vey
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
r ² = 0.99
Site Symbols
901676214029393183
Precision of Juvenile Snorkel Surveys
Fis
h/M
ete
r2
Year
North Coast
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
Mid-Coast
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
Mid-South Coast
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
Umpqua
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
South Coast
1998 1999 2000 2001
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
No Data
North Coast
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Mid-Coast
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Mid-South Coast
Me
an
% o
f P
oo
ls p
er
Sit
e w
ith
Co
ho
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Umpqua
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
South Coast
Year
1998 1999 2000 2001
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
No Data
446(
15)
536(
10)
600(
10)
689(
5)78
1(11
)20
72(1
8)21
03(9
)21
61(1
0)22
20(1
2)11
53(1
0)13
76(3
1)10
23(1
7)40
(21)
2002
(5)
1542
(5)
152(
3)13
19(1
7)67
9(8)
1905
(34)
486(
4)13
85(1
8)44
0(18
)14
52(2
9)93
1(12
)11
99(3
)64
0(26
)32
6(15
)
Juve
nile
Co
ho
/m2
0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21.41.61.82.02.2 Mid-South Coast 1999
Site Number (sample size)
Adults/Mile
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Juv
enile
s/M
ile
0
200
400
600
800
R2=0.58 ; P=0.13
R2=0.94 ; P=0.01
Mid-CoastMid-South Coast North Coast 1999South Coast Umpqua 1999
1999 Adults vs 2000 Juveniles
1998 Adults vs 1999 Juveniles
Mid-Coast
Mid-South Coast
North Coast
South CoastUmpqua
Relationship Between Spawners and Juveniles
Adults/Mile
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
% E
gg
to
Pa
rr S
urv
iva
l
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
1999 Juvenile Data2000 Juvenile Data
Egg to Parr Survival Rates
Task 3: Adult Abundance Monitoring
Key QuestionsPopulation Status?Populations Trends?Spatial and Temporal Distribution?Occurrence of Hatchery Fish in Natural Spawning
Populations?
MONITORING APPROACH
BASED ON ADULT BASED ON ADULT SPAWNERSSPAWNERS
UTILIZES VISUAL COUNTS UTILIZES VISUAL COUNTS IN STREAM SURVEYSIN STREAM SURVEYS
BIOLOGICAL SAMPLING BIOLOGICAL SAMPLING AND TAG RECOVERY AND TAG RECOVERY FROM SPAWNED FROM SPAWNED CARCASSESCARCASSES
SpawningRearing and MigrationMigration
• Coho Salmon• 240 sites for the ESU• 40 sites/population complex
• Steelhead• 60 sites/ESU (2 ESUs)• 20 sites/population complex
ADULT SURVEYSADULT SURVEYS
Precision of Spawner Abundance EstimatesPrecision of Spawner Abundance Estimates
Geographic Unit
Relative Precision
1990-97
1998-2000
Goal EMAP
ESU + 28% + 20% + 16%
MA + 54% + 30% + 22%
Major Basin + 63% + 60% + 35%
COHO SPAWNER ABUNDANCE IN COASTAL ESUCOHO SPAWNER ABUNDANCE IN COASTAL ESU
1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
NORTH COAST
MID COAST
UMPQUA
MID-SOUTH COAST
AD
UL
T C
OH
O S
PA
WN
ER
S +
/- 9
5%
C I
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
ACCURACY OF SURVEY-BASED ACCURACY OF SURVEY-BASED ABUNDANCE ESTIMATESABUNDANCE ESTIMATES
Smith River Adult Coho
Year
1999 2000 2001
Adu
lt S
paw
ners
+ 9
5% C
onfid
ence
Inte
rval
s
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
Mark-Recapture EstmateSurvey Estimate
STREAMS
SPAWNER DENSITY 0 - 5 6 - 10 11 - 20 21 - 50 51 - 100 101 - 700
COHO COHO SPAWNER SPAWNER DENSITY IN DENSITY IN MID-SOUTH MID-SOUTH COAST GCGCOAST GCG
HATCHERY-WILD RATIO OF SPAWNERS HATCHERY-WILD RATIO OF SPAWNERS
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
South Coast 2000 (n=63)
South Coast 1999 (n=39)
South Coast 1998 (n=54)
Mid-South Coast 2000 (n=280)
Mid-South Coast 1999 (n=267)
Mid-South Coast 1998 (n=788)
Umpqua 2000 (n=425)
Umpqua 1999 (n=136)
Umpqua 1998 (n=108)
Mid Coast 2000 (n=144)
Mid Coast 1999 (n=49)
Mid Coast 1998 (n=212)
North Coast 2000 (n=500)
North Coast 1999 (n=61)
North Coast 1998 (n=44)
Hatchery Wild
RATIONALE AND RELATIONSHIP TO REGIONAL PROGRAMS
FWP, NMFS BiOp, Subbasin Summaries and the Oregon Plan all call for:
Increased M&E of status and trends in biological and environmental conditions at the Province and Subbasin scales
A framework for the coordination and integration of monitoring efforts
A process to prioritize how and where habitat protection and restoration efforts are focused
WHAT IS AT RISK IF THIS PROJECT IS NOT FUNDED?
Resource managers will continue to lack the data to evaluate resource status and trends and assess progress towards recovery
Our ability to learn from what we do (adaptive management) will continue to be limited
Implementing this program will provide the data to assess long-term trends in resource status at Provincial and Subbasin scales
Thank You