Www.fishsciences.net Adult Entry to Summer Juvenile Rearing of Klamath River Coho Randolph Ericksen Steven Cramer Ian Courter Kathryn Arendt Funded by

www.fishsciences.net

Adult Entry to Summer Juvenile Rearing of Klamath River Coho

Randolph EricksenSteven Cramer

Ian CourterKathryn Arendt

Funded byBureau of Reclamation



Overview

• Adult entry, migration, and survival


Overview


• Juvenile production


Overview


• Juvenile production

• Redistribution of fry and parr through summer



Spawning Distribution


Adult Migration and Survival


Adult Entry and Migration: Klamath mouth to Trinity River

• Yurok Tribal Harvest Data

• Willow Creek Weir Data

0.00

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.10

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.18

0.20

0.22

0.24

0.26

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.80

0.90

1.00TRH coho

Wild

Cumulative

8/17

9/14

10/1

211

/09

12/0

71/

04


Adult Entry and Migration: Trinity to Salmon River

• Limited coho telemetry data

• One week later than mouth to Trinity

0.00

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.10

0.12

0.14

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

Weekly

Cumulative

1.38/17

9/14

10/1

211

/09

12/0

71/

04


Adult Entry and Migration: Scott River to Shasta River

• Shasta River Counting Facility

0

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.1

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.18

0.2

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

Wild coho

Cumulative

8/17

9/14

10/1

211

/09

12/0

71/

04


Adult Entry and Migration: Shasta River to Iron Gate Dam

• Iron Gate Hatchery Returns

0

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.1

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.18

0.2

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

IGH coho

Cumulative

8/17

9/14

10/1

211

/09

12/0

71/

04


Coho Passage through Main Stem Reaches

0.00

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.10

0.12

0.14

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

Weekly

Cumulative

1.3

0.00

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.10

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

Weekly

Cumulative

0.00

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.10

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

Weekly

Cumulative

0

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.1

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.18

0.2

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

Wild coho

Cumulative

0.00

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.10

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.18

0.20

0.22

0.24

0.26

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.80

0.90

1.00TRH coho

Wild

Cumulative

0

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.1

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.18

0.2

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

IGH coho

Cumulative

Klamath to Trinity R Trinity to Salmon R Salmon R to Portuguese Ck

Portuguese Ck to Scott R Scott R to Shasta R Shasta R to Iron Gate Dam

8/17

9/14

10/1

211

/09

12/0

71/

048/

179/

1410

/12

11/0

9

12/0

71/

048/

179/

1410

/12

11/0

9

12/0

71/

04



• Adult entry and migration

• In-river fishery & predation


Fixed Inriver Mortality Rates

• Net Fisheries = 4.5%

• Pinniped Predation = 1.7%




• Inriver fishery & predation

• Prespawn mortality – temperature related


Prespawning Mortality Rates for Trinity River Chinook and Coho 1989–1990

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

9/18

10/2

10/1

610

/30

11/1

311

/27

12/1

112

/25

1/8

First Day of Survey Week

Per

cen

t S

paw

nin

g M

ort

alit

y Chinook

Coho

Spring


Pre-spawn Survival

iTiespawne

S 75.001.15,Pr1

1

iTiespawn

eS 75.001.15,Pr

1

1

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

Mean weekly temperature (oC)

Pre

-sp

awn

su

rviv

al


Trinity River Chinook Escapement and Pre-spawn Mortality 1978–1992

R2 = 0.7287

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200

Escapement (x100)

Per

cen

t F

emal

e M

ort

alit

y






• Egg viability






• Egg viability

• Egg loss – flow related


“Based on the limited data collected from these surveys, coho salmon that spawn in the main stem of the Klamath River build larger redds in deeper water than coho salmon found in other rivers. Main stem Klamath River coho salmon also build redds where water velocity is near or above the upper end of the preferred range.” —Magneson and Gough 2006.



Relationship of Shear Stress to Discharge Based on Four Cross-sections of Klamath River

y = 5.57Ln(x) - 2.99

R2 = 0.67

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

0 200 400 600 800 1000

Discharge (cms)

Sh

ear

stre

ss (

N/m

2 )

Entrainment of spawning

gravel (24.77N/m2)

146.2 cms(= 5,163 cfs)


Peak Discharge at Iron Gate Dam 1960–2005

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

1960

1964

1969

1972

1976

1981

1985

1989

1993

1997

2001

2005

Pea

k an

nu

al d

isch

arg

e (c

fs)






• Egg viability

• Egg loss – flow related

• Females


Proportion of Female Spawners Fixed

• Proportion of Females = 0.55


Juvenile Coho Production

• Natal smolt production estimated for each spawning tributary (Tech memo 5)

• Fry and parr movement from non-natal streams (this Tech memo)

• Non-natal smolt production (Final Report)




Relationship between Migrant Fry and Female Spawners for Eight Oregon Streams

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

40,000

- 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160

Female spawners/km

Mig

rati

ng

fry

/km

Siletz Mill WF Smith Flynn Cr. Needle Br. Deer Cr. Yaquina Mill Winchester Cascade Cr.


Regression Analysis of Migrant Fry and Female Spawners from Oregon Streams

Stream Habitat (km) Reg. slope n R2 p

Needle Br. 1.0 623 8 0.88 0.000

Flynn Cr. 1.4 517 9 0.97 0.000

Deer Cr. 2.3 194 9 0.90 0.000

Mill Cr (Yaq) 4.2 242 8 0.90 0.000

Winchester Cr.

6.5 258 6 0.92 0.000

Cascade Cr. 11.5 39 8 0.02 0.077

Mill Cr. (Sil.) 18.0 84 8 0.74 0.001

WF Smith 48.0 56 7 0.99 0.000


Slope of Migrant Fry per Female Spawner vs. Km of Habitat

y = 549.28x-0.5972

R2 = 0.90

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

0 10 20 30 40 50

Km of habitat in basin

Slo

pe

of

mig

ran

t fr

y r

ela

tio

ns

hip


Predicting Number of Fry Migrating from Tributaries

Migrant fry

= (Females)*549.28*(km of habitat-0.5972)


Fry and Parr Movement

• Fry dispersal

• Age 0 movement from Scott & Shasta– Later migration of parr triggered by

increasing temperatures and decreasing flows

– Age 0 smolts emigrating from Shasta River


Estimated Age 0 Migrants from Scott and Shasta Rivers

Scott River Shasta River

2005 2006 2004 2005 2006

Fry 22,482 436 42 3,121 33

Parr 58,016 1,336 460 9,411 367

Age 0 smolt 633 3,049 470

Age 0 migrants 80,498 1,772 1,135 15,581 870


Relationship between Migrant Parr and Migrant Fry for the Scott (2005 and 2006)

and Shasta Rivers (2004–2006).

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000

Migrant fry

Mig

ran

t p

arr

Shasta

Scott

Predicted

y = 2.589x

R2 = 0.99


Predicting Number of Age 0 Migrant Parr and Smolt from the Scott and Shasta Rivers

Migrant parr = (Migrant fry)*2.589

Age 0 smolt = (Migrant parr)*0.28 + 436


Non-natal movement assumptions

• Parr will only move from main stem into tributaries associated with thermal refugia.

• Parr will only move to non-natal tributaries within their reach.

• Non-natal parr will only utilize habitat not fully seeded by natal fish.

• Parr use of non-natal habitat decreases with distance upstream.


Percent of summer capacity available to non-natal juvenile coho

Distance (m) from main stem

Potential capacity available to migrants

0-400 100%

400-800 80%

800-1,200 20%

1,200-1,600 5%

> 1,600 0

Documents

Www.fishsciences.net Adult Entry to Summer Juvenile Rearing of Klamath River Coho Randolph Ericksen Steven Cramer Ian Courter Kathryn Arendt Funded by