Salmonid Fish Monitoring in Winchester Creek: ODFW databases - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Salmonid Fish Monitoring in Winchester Creek:

• ODFW databases
• Monitoring trends
• A future for coho salmon?

Oregon Coast ESU Naturally Produced Coho Salmon

100000 200000 300000 400000 500000 600000 700000 800000 900000 1 9 5 1 9 5 4 1 9 5 8 1 9 6 2 1 9 6 6 1 9 7 1 9 7 4 1 9 7 8 1 9 8 2 1 9 8 6 1 9 9 1 9 9 4 1 9 9 8 2 2 2 6 2 1

Pre-fishery population Total spawners

The Oregon Plan for Salmon and Watersheds

• Voluntary restoration actions by private landowners
• Coordinated state and federal agency and tribal actions

to support private restoration, manage public lands, promote awareness

• Oversight by an independent panel of scientists who

evaluate the plans effectiveness, guide research investments

• Monitoring watershed health, water quality and salmon

recovery to document existing conditions, track changes, and determine the impact of programs and actions

Salmonid Life-Cycle Monitoring Project

• Estimate abundance of returning adult salmonid

fishes and downstream-migrating juvenile fish

• Estimate marine and freshwater survival rates for

coho salmon

Coho salmon life-history

• Three year life cycle
• Spawn in fall, fry emerge in late winter
• Juveniles spend one full year in freshwater

(through summer low-flow period and winter high-flow period)

• Migrate to ocean in spring as age-1 smolts
• Spend 1 ½ years in ocean before returning to

spawn

LCM Trap Sites

Monitoring in Winchester Creek

• Coho spawner returns and smolt out-migrants
• Sea-run cutthroat trout out-migrants
• Aquatic habitat inventory (5-10 year cycles)
• Short-term studies of juvenile coho and cutthroat trout life-history

(using PIT-tag and acoustic tag technology)

• Beaver dam/pool habitat

Smolt to adult (marine) survival

• Most mortality occurs during first month or two

following ocean entrance

• Varies widely, depending on:

– Timing of spring transition from nearshore down-welling to up-welling conditions (forced by northwest winds) – Strength and duration of upwelling cycles, which drive primary production (salmon food)

Winchester Creek: Coho Salmon Marine Survival (%)

5 10 15 20 25

1 9 9 8 1 9 9 9 2 2 1 2 2 2 3 2 4 2 5 2 6 2 7 2 8 2 9 2 1

Coho salmon marine survival (%)

5 10 15 20 25

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

NF Nehalem River 5 10 15 20 25

1 9 9 8 1 9 9 9 2 2 1 2 2 2 3 2 4 2 5 2 6 2 7 2 8 2 9 2 1

Siletz Mill Creek 5 10 15 20 25

1 9 9 8 1 9 9 9 2 2 1 2 2 2 3 2 4 2 5 2 6 2 7 2 8 2 9 2 1

Winchester Creek

5 10 15 20 25

1 9 9 8 1 9 9 9 2 2 1 2 2 2 3 2 4 2 5 2 6 2 7 2 8 2 9 2 1 WF Smith River

Winchester Creek Coho Salmon

y = 465.81x

• 0.4483

R

2 = 0.6028

50 100 150 200 50 100 150 200 Female Spawners Female Recruits [R]

WF Smith River Coho Salmon

y = 6015.6x-0.8812 R2 = 0.8667

50 100 150 200 500 1000 1500 2000

Female Spawners Female Recruits [R]

More Wild Coho Salmon

• Given that marine survival rate determines number
• f returning adults:

more returning adults more wild smolts better habitat higher carrying capacity

200 400 600 800 1000 1200

NF Nehalem Siletz Mill Cascade Lobster WF Smith Winchester

Smolts / KM Rearing Habitat

Beaver Habitat Monitoring

• Fall surveys (summer habitat for fish) in 2008, 2009,

2010

• Spring surveys (overwinter habitat for fish) began 2010
• Document dam distribution, fish-passage barriers, and

pool area/volume

Annual Changes (Fall 2008 -Fall 2009)

Beaver Pool Volume: Total Basin

Pool Volume (m3)

500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500

Fall 2008 Fall 2009 Spring 2010 Fall 2010

Lower Big Creek

Upper Big Creek

Survey Peak Total 1993 2009 24 25 2010 28 44

Big Creek coho salmon surveys

Survey Peak Total 2008 2009 3 3 2010 1 2

Big Creek (Trib. B) coho salmon surveys

Five Mile Creek

Five Mile Creek

Habitat survey in 1969; predominantly fine in- stream sediments, limited spawning gravel, adjacent hillsides clear-cut, no fish-passage barriers Spawning surveys in 1992, 1993, 1994; no coho salmon observed Juvenile fish surveys in 1969 (seine), 1995 and 2010 (electro-fisher); no coho salmon

• bserved, cutthroat trout widely distributed

Three Mile Creek Two Mile Creek

Three Mile Creek

Habitat survey in 1969; predominantly fine in-stream sediments, little spawning gravel, adjacent hillsides clear-cut, no fish passage barriers No spawner surveys, but a note was recorded in 1969 stating “local residents noted salmon spawned in creek before opening of Seven Devils Mine” [chromite mine, operated 1943] Juvenile fish surveys in 1969 (seine), 2010 (electro-fisher); no coho salmon observed, only cutthroat trout Primary drainage basin for currently planned mineral sand mining areas

Two Mile Creek

Habitat survey in 1969 (entire creek) and 2005 (0.5 km reach) ; predominantly fine in-stream sediments, little spawning gravel, lower reach gorse-covered pasture, upper reaches clear-cut, no fish passage barriers Juvenile fish surveys in 1969 (seine), 2005 and 2010 (electro-fisher); no coho salmon observed, only cutthroat trout

Coho Salmon Production in the Oregon Coast ESU

1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020 Number of Adults

500,000 1,000,000 1,500,000 2,000,000 2,500,000 3,000,000 3,500,000

Coho Salmon Production in the Oregon Coast ESU

1 9 9 7 1 9 9 8 1 9 9 9 2 2 1 2 2 2 3 2 4 2 5 2 6 2 7 2 8 2 9 2 1 2 1 1 2 1 2

Number of Adults

100000 200000 300000 400000 500000 600000 700000 800000 900000 1000000

~2008 2009-10 ~2006-7 Coos County Forest Land

Land Use

• Managed for

timber harvest

• Maintained

trails used for recreational ATV riding

• Potential

methane gas extraction

• Potential

mineral sands mining East Fork Trib C Middle Fork West Fork

• Northwest Environmental Advocates v. Locke, et al.

[state of Oregon] won lawsuit in Sept. 2010

• Suit alleged current regulations (Forest Practices Act) do

not adequately protect riparian areas and prevent non- point pollution (impairing water quality) resulting from forestry activities (timber harvest and associated road networks)

• EPA and NOAA do not advise revision of the Forest

Practices Act.

• Alternatively, ODEQ and ODF have until May 2014 to

develop a “…prescriptive TMDL approach” to comply with requirements for non-point pollution control mandated by EPA and NOAA, or lose federal Coastal Zone Management Act grant funding

Oregon Coast Coho Conservation Plan: 2007

• Habitat enhancement and improvement is the key to

protecting and enhancing coastal coho

• Much of the most important coho habitat is on private

land

• Habitat improvement on private land is most likely to
• ccur through incentive-based cooperative partnerships

with landowners

• The Oregon Plan provides the best vehicle for securing

these partnerships and implementing habitat improvements