Conversion rates of adult sockeye between Bonneville Dam
Conversion rates of adult sockeye between Bonneville Dam and the Wenatchee and Okanagan Basins Jeffrey K. Fryer, Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission Kim Hyatt, Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada Skyeler Folks and Howie Wright, Okanagan Nation Alliance
History of CRITFC adult salmon sampling program at Bonneville Adult Fish Facility Age, length-at-age, and stock composition studies: – – – Sockeye since 1985. Spring Chinook since 1987. Summer Chinook since 1990. Fall Chinook since 1997. Steelhead since 2004 (previously done by WDFW/ODFW). Coho from 1998 to 2003. Studies have evolved to track fish condition genetics (2003) and PIT tagging (since 2006). Reports reports are at www. critfc. org.
Why tag adult salmon when so many juveniles are already tagged? l Existing tagging is unrepresentative of the overall run returning to Bonneville Dam l Despite the millions of fish tagged annually in the Columbia Basin, relatively few tagged adults return.
D es ch ut es l H W an il d fo rd -R IS (w il d l. M ) c. N ar y (w l ild Sn ) ak e H at ch er y l Sn l ak W e en W at ild ch ee H at ch l er W y en at ch ee W ild l. O ka no ga n l. D Number of juvenile sockeye salmon PIT tagged in 2010 by stock l 80000 l 60000 l 40000 l 20000 l 0
Percentage of the total number of both juvenile sockeye PIT tagged and returning adults by stock in 2010 l 80% l% tagged l 60% Going away in 2011 Tagged at PRD, WAN, and MCN (mixed stock) l% of run l 40% l 20% X en at ch ee -H at ch er y l W en at ch ee -W l ild O ka no ga n. H at ch er y l O ka no ga n. W ild W l. S Sn ak e. W ild l. W l. S Sn ak e. H at ch er y l 0%
How representative is our sampling? Only trapping on one of four ladders for a few hours each day. Fish Passage Operations and Coordination Team (FPOM) Bonneville trap restrictions vary from year to year and have badly biased our Chinook sample (steelhead unknown) in some years and greatly reduced precision of steelhead and Chinook data. Sockeye data appears representative.
Goals of Accords Projects PIT Tagging at Bonneville Dam (Chinook, sockeye, steelhead) – Estimate upstream mortality and migration rates on a reach- and migratory timing-specific basis. – Estimate stock composition as well as stock-specific age and length-at-age composition. – Estimate escapement in terminal areas. Limiting Factors for Okanagan and Wenatchee sockeye – Expand knowledge on factors limiting production of Okanagan and Wenatchee sockeye salmon stocks. – Focused thus far on Okanagan basin, funding PIT tag receivers and acoustic tagging.
Biomark installed PIT tag antennas in Canada on the Okanagan River upstream of Osoyoos Lake Nov 2009 -Mar 2010 (OKC)
PIT tag antennas installed by Biomark at both Zosel Dam fish ladders in September 2010 (ZOS)
Results In 2009 and 2010 we tagged about 850 sockeye salmon annually. In both years, sampling was halted early when we exceeded our Snake River sockeye salmon ESA take of 5 fish. We missed less than 5% of the run in both years.
Percentage of tagged sockeye salmon detected at upstream dams in 2009
Percentage of fish tagged at Bonneville detected at Rock Island Dam l 100% l. Percentage passing RIS l 80% l 60% l 2006 l 40% l 2007 l 2008 l 2009 l 0% l 1 -Jun l 11 -Jun l 21 -Jun l 1 -Jul l. Week tagged at Bonneville l 11 -Jul
Travel time between dam pairs Distance (km) 2009 Median time (days) 2009 Median travel time (km/day) 2008 Median travel time (km/day 2007 Median travel time (km/day) 2006 Median travel time (km/day) Bonneville-Mc. Nary 231 5. 1 45. 2 40. 3 47. 3 46. 1 Mc. Nary-Priest Rapids 167 4. 0 41. 4 36. 4 34. 3 37. 2 Priest Rapids-Rock Island 89 3. 1 28. 7 28. 2 24. 5 22. 6 Rock Island-Rocky Reach 33 1. 1 29. 1 30. 7 21. 3 24. 4 Rock Island-Tumwater 73 11. 2 6. 5 6. 3 Rocky Reach-Wells 65 2. 2 29. 6 29. 3 28. 2 22. 7 Bonneville-Rock Island 487 12. 7 38. 2 34. 7 35. 1 34. 9 Bonneville-Wells 585 26. 0 21. 6 32. 5 32. 8 32. 2 Dam pair
Percent night (2000 -0400) passage at dams in 2008 and 2009 Dam 2009 Wenatchee Okanagan 2008 Wenatchee Okanagan Bonneville 0. 0 0. 8 1. 5 2. 8 Mc. Nary-OR shore 2. 1 6. 4 3. 3 6. 0 Mc. Nary-WA shore 2. 6 6. 8 8. 8 5. 2 Priest Rapids 0. 0 3. 4 1. 5 5. 9 Rock Island 0. 0 1. 2 3. 2 4. 4 Rocky Reach Wells Tumwater 8. 2 5. 4 8. 3 12. 1 7. 1 6. 1
Sockeye fallback-reascension rates 2006 -2009 Dam 2009 2008 2007 2006 Bonneville 1. 1% 0. 5% 2. 7% 0. 2% Mc. Nary 3. 3% 1. 1% 0. 2% 0. 5% Priest Rapids 1. 4% 1. 6% 3. 0% 0. 8% Rock Island 1. 3% 1. 0% 1. 2% 1. 0% Rocky Reach 1. 5% 4. 0% 1. 5% Wells 1. 0% 0. 7% 2. 7% 3. 3% Tumwater 5. 7% 1. 5% Ice Harbor 11. 1% 0. 0% Lower Granite 33. 3%
PIT Tagged sockeye “missed” at dams 2006 -2010 Sockeye Dam 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2008 8. 5 mm Bonneville 0. 7% 0. 6% 0. 4% 2. 1% 0. 2% 1. 7% Mc. Nary 4. 0% 5. 0% 10. 1% 6. 5% 3. 1% 18. 2% Priest Rapids 0. 4% 0. 3% 0. 8% 0. 0% 33. 7% Rock Island 6. 4% 2. 6% 6. 9% 6. 8% 1. 3% 57. 7% Rocky Reach 0. 5% 0. 0% 0. 2% 0. 7% 12. 3% 28. 3% Ice Harbor 0. 0% 20. 0% 33. 3%
Sockeye Escapement at Mainstem Dams as estimated using PIT tags and Visual Fish Counts in 2009 Dam PIT Tag Estimate Bonneville Ladder Count 2010 % difference 174, 000 Mc. Nary 149, 000 122, 000 Priest Rapids 142, 000 153, 000 Rock Island 139, 000 162, 800 Rocky Reach 116, 000 133, 000 Wells 113, 000 Tumwater PIT Tag Estimate Ladder Count % difference 386, 500 22. 3% 315, 000 278, 800 13. 0% -7. 2% 303, 300 357, 100 -15. 1% -14. 5% 295, 000 338, 300 -12. 8% -12. 5% 247, 600 295, 600 -16. 3% 135, 000 -16. 1% 243, 300 291, 800 -16. 6% 21, 000 16, 000 31. 9% 50, 500 35, 800 40. 9% Ice Harbor 3, 000 900 252. 5% 2, 700 1, 300 104. 8% Lower Granite 3, 000 1200 150. 7% 2, 100 2, 200 -3. 9%
Time spent at mainstem dams Taking more than 12 hours (%) Dam 2009 Minutes (median) 2009 2008 2007 2006 58 5. 7% 6. 9% 15. 8% 6. 8% Mc. Nary 0 2. 1% 1. 4% 1. 8% 3. 2% Priest Rapids 5 1. 2% 0. 6% 2. 4% Rock Island 3 1. 1% 0. 3% 1. 2% 1. 8% Rocky Reach 2 1. 5% 1. 0% 1. 2% 2. 7% Wells 3 2. 1% 0. 8% 1. 7% 4. 8% 159 41. 4% 62. 1% Bonneville Tumwater
What’s happening at Tumwater Dam? Tumwater has two PIT tag antennas. l. If all sockeye last detected at Of 108 sockeye last detected at Tumwater Dam Last Antenna Downstream of TUF Upstream of TUF Not Detected Upper (73) 0 43 30 Lower (35) 2 0 33 the lower antenna did not pass Tumwater Dam, then 32. 4% of sockeye reaching Tumwater Dam in 2010 did not pass over it. Median Time at Tumwater Dam (days) Last Antenna Downstream Upper Lower Upstream Not Detected 6. 2 17. 5 6. 5 20. 6 l. A similar analysis published in a CRITFC technical report in 2009 estimated 18. 3% of sockeye salmon reaching Tumwater Dam did not pass over it.
Wells Dam Tagging l. Since 2009, we’ve been acoustic and temperature tagging sockeye at Wells Dam l. In 2010 we began PIT tagging at Wells Dam to supplement sockeye PIT tagged at Bonneville Dam l. PIT tagged fish are detected at OKC (since March 2010) and Zosel Dam (since September, 2010) l. In 2010, with the ONA and Colville Tribe we deployed 24 VEMCO acoustic receivers between the Okanagan River mouth and Okanagan Falls
Okanagan Basin Acoustic Receiver Sites
Acoustic and Temperature Tagging at Wells Dam
(Preliminary) estimated conversion rate from Wells Dam to OKC of PIT, acoustic, and temperature tagged sockeye salmon in 2010 Location and Tags Deployed Week Bonneville Wells PIT Tagged only Wells PIT+ Acoustic Wells PIT+Temperature Wells PIT+Temp +Acoustic 27 86. 1% 90. 0% 93. 3% 28 85. 7% 89. 0% 73. 3% 85. 7% 29 79. 1% 66. 3% 43. 8% 33. 3% 50. 0% 30 34. 6% 40. 6% 41. 7% 42. 9% 33. 3% 31 54. 2% 55. 6% 50. 0% 45. 5% 0. 0% 75. 2% 73. 7% 54. 7% 55. 1% 63. 4% 548 400 Weighted Sample Size 47 37 15 Note 2010 had low temperatures, rates in most years are expected to be much lower.
Conclusions Know the limitations imposed by your data. Do the fish tagged represent what you assume they represent? With respect to CRITFC adult sampling, biases (and to a lesser extent, low precision) are of great concern to me (particularly since they seem to be ignored by some users of our data). PIT tagging adults can provide an overwhelming amount of data (and it increases every year). Analysis of PIT tag data has pointed to passage problems at Tumwater Dam for the past three years. Data comparing Wells-OKC conversion rates of Bonneville and Wells tagged fish suggests relatively low mortality (tag loss? ) resulting from PIT tagging but greater mortality (tag loss? ) from tagging with acoustic and temperature tags. Next year, both OKC and ZOS will be operational and I can’t wait (but also dread) the data!
Acknowledgements Yakama Indian Nation for Wells and Tumwater sampling. Colville Tribe for assistance in Wells tagging, Zosel PIT tag antenna installation, and installation and maintenance of acoustic tag network. Okanagan Nation BPA funding under Columbia Basin Accords
- Slides: 25