impacts of dam and reservoir passage on outmigrating juvenile hatchery chinook salmon: results from...

IMPACTS OF DAM AND RESERVOIR PASSAGE ON IMPACTS OF DAM AND RESERVOIR PASSAGE ON OUTMIGRATING JUVENILE HATCHERY CHINOOK OUTMIGRATING JUVENILE HATCHERY CHINOOK

SALMON: RESULTS FROM A PAIRED RELEASE SALMON: RESULTS FROM A PAIRED RELEASE STUDY IN THE UPPER WILLAMETTE STUDY IN THE UPPER WILLAMETTE

RIVER BASINRIVER BASIN

Oregon Department of Fish and WildlifeCorvallis Research Laboratory

Jason R. Brandt

Thomas A. Friesen

Marc A. Johnson

Paul M. Olmsted

Study Code JPL-11-02-MF and JPL-11-02-DET

ObjectivesObjectives

Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions

Estimate the effect that passage through dams and reservoirs in the Middle Fork Willamette and North Santiam rivers has on outmigration success (relative detection rate) of juvenile hatchery Chinook salmon

Estimate the effect that passage through dams and reservoirs has on survivorship to adulthood for juvenile hatchery Chinook salmon

Useful ancillary data: movement and growth rates of juvenile hatchery Chinook salmon released above and below dams

Study Area and Release Sites– MFWStudy Area and Release Sites– MFW

Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions

Dexter TRLOP TR

LOP FB

LOP HOR

HCR

Study Area and Release Sites – NSStudy Area and Release Sites – NS

Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions

Minto TR

Detroit FB

Detroit HOR

Tagging & ReleaseTagging & ReleaseIntroduction Methods Results Summary Questions

Hatchery fish used

One-time yearly releases

Major assumption: hatchery fish are phenotypically similar to naturally-produced fish entering the reservoirs (size, timing, behavior, condition, etc.)

Tagging & Release – MFWTagging & Release – MFW

Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions

Release Location

Release Year Dexter TR LOP TR LOP FB LOP HOR HCR

2011 5,959 -- -- 5,967* --

2012 49,371 -- -- 49,651 49,330

2013 37,299 -- 37,310 37,200 33,301

2014 33,520 33,952 34,544 32,769 --

*200,673 CWT fish released in addition to PIT tags

Tagging & Release – NSTagging & Release – NS

Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions

Release Location

Release Year Minto TR Detroit FB Detroit HOR

2012 12,475* -- 12,465*

2013 33,299 33,246 33,208

2014 33,463 33,485 33,478

*75,069 total CWT fish released in addition to PIT tags

Detection & RecoveryDetection & RecoveryIntroduction Methods Results Summary Questions

PIT tags (2011-2019): Outmigrants at Willamette Falls, detection

efficiency <10% Adults at Willamette Falls, detection

efficiency 100% Other researchers

CWTs (2013-2017): Fisheries, hatcheries, spawner surveys

Outmigration Success– MFWOutmigration Success– MFWIntroduction Methods Results Summary Questions

N=503

N=201

N=2,747

N=534

N=15

N=1,331

N=468

N=383

N=13

N=453

N=600

N=132

N=27

Relative Survival – MFWRelative Survival – MFWIntroduction Methods Results Summary Questions

Release Year

Release Location

Dexter TR LOP TR FB HOR HCR

2011 0.084y n/a n/a 0.034z n/a

2012 0.056x n/a n/a 0.011y 3.0x10-4 z

2013 0.036w n/a 0.013x 0.011y 3.9x10-4 z

2014 0.014w 0.018x 0.004y 8.2x10-4 z n/a

Outmigration Success– NSOutmigration Success– NSIntroduction Methods Results Summary Questions

N=1,045

N=895

N=1,000N=844

N=734

N=416

N=469

N=254

Relative Survival – NSRelative Survival – NSIntroduction Methods Results Summary Questions

Release Year

Release Location

TR FB HOR

2012 0.084y n/a 0.072z

2013 0.037x 0.029y 0.024z

2014 0.012y 0.014y 0.008z

Movement Rate– MFWMovement Rate– MFWIntroduction Methods Results Summary Questions

N=503

N=201

N=2,747N=534

N=15

N=1,331

N=468

N=383

N=13

N=600

N=453 N=132

N=27

Z Z

X Y

Z

WX Y

Z YZ Z Z

Movement Rate– NSMovement Rate– NSIntroduction Methods Results Summary Questions

N=1,045 N=895

N=1,000

N=844 N=734

N=416 N=469 N=254

Y

ZY Y

Z

Y Y Z

Growth– MFWGrowth– MFWIntroduction Methods Results Summary Questions

N=11

N=13

N=81

N=316

N=41

N=9

N=332

N=273

N=79

N=50 N=19N=271

N=195

Y

Z

YZ Z

YZ Z

Z

X X Y Z

Growth– NSGrowth– NSIntroduction Methods Results Summary Questions

N=9

N=107

N=372N=283

N=25N=18

Y

Z Y Z

ZZ

Juvenile to Adult SurvivalJuvenile to Adult Survival MFW: 4 adult returns from 2011 releases

(2TR, 2HOR), 7 adult returns from 2012 releases (2TR, 5HOR)

NS: 6 adult returns from 2012 releases (3TR, 3HOR)

Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions

Key PointsKey PointsNo surprises; in general fish released above projects:

Migrated slower to Willamette Falls=lentic environment and dam passage, reservoir fish usually delayed by month or longer

Grew faster than the tailrace group=conducive reservoir growing conditions, possible long term survival advantage?

Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions

Key PointsKey PointsNo surprises; fish released above projects: Detected at a lower rate=consistent evidence of dam/reservoir impacts related

to lower outmigration success; impacts appear to be greater in the MFW

Effect sizes for differences in detections between Dexter TR and LOP HOR: 2011= 2.5:1, 60%

2012= 5.14:1, 80.5% 2013= 3.4:1, 70.6% 2014= 16.78:1, 94%

Effect sizes for differences in detections between Minto TR and Detroit HOR: 2012= 1.17:1, 14.5% 2013= 1.56:1, 36% 2014= 1.64:1, 39%

Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions

USACE - Rich Piaskowski, Greg Taylor, Todd Pierce, Doug Garletts, Chad Helms, Nathaniel Erickson et al.

ODFW – Dan Peck & staff, Greg Grenbemer & staff, Fred Monzyk, Jeremy Romer, Ryan Emig, Kelly Reis, Kirk Schroeder, Suzette Savoie

NOAA – Bill Muir (original concept)

Biomark, Inc. – PIT tagging

PSMFC – Tag recovery database

PGE – Interrogation facility

AcknowledgmentsAcknowledgments

Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions

Questions & DiscussionQuestions & Discussion

http://oregonstate.edu/dept/ODFW/willamettesalmonidrme

Stayton and Bennett– NSStayton and Bennett– NS

Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions

2014 NS releases detected: 2,976 TR, 744 FB, and 353 HOR

Also detected at Willamette Falls: 162 TR (5%), 137 FB (18%), 52 HOR (15%)

2014 STW NS releases detected: 26 TR

FateFate

Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions

Anecdotal, but compelling case for substantial predation

MFW: 124 mortalities avian predationNS: 30 mortalities avian predation

MFW: 198 mortalities piscine predation– 158 from crappie– 18 from walleye– 11 from northern pikeminnow– 10 from largemouth bass– 1 from cutthroat trout

Detections and Discharge– MFWDetections and Discharge– MFW

Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions

Month (2011)

May Jul Sep Nov

Discharge (kcfs)0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

Daily D

etections 0

20

40

60

80

Willamette Discharge at SalemDexter TRLOP HOR

Month (2012-13)

May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul

Discharge (kcfs)0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Daily D

etections 0

50

100

150

200

250

Willamette Discharge at SalemDexter TRLOP HORHCR

Month (2013-14)

Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

Dis

cha

rge

(kcfs)

20

40

60

80

100

120

Da

ily De

tectio

ns

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Willamette Discharge at SalemDexter TRLOP FBLOP HORHCR

Detections and Discharge– NSDetections and Discharge– NS

Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions

Month (2012-13)

Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep D

ischarge (kcfs)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Daily D

etections 0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Willamette Discharge at SalemMinto TRDetroit HOR

Month (2013-14)

Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul

Discharge (kcfs)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Daily D

etections 0

20

40

60

80

Willamette Discharge at SalemMinto TRDetroit FBDetroit HOR

Effects of Dam Operations – LOPEffects of Dam Operations – LOP

Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions

Month (2011)

May Jun Jul Aug Sep

Flo

w (kcfs)

0

2

4

6

8

10

LOP Total Discharge LOP Spill

Month (2012)

May Jun Jul Aug Sep

Flo

w (kcfs)

0

2

4

6

8

10

LOP Total DischargeLOP Spill

Month (2013)

May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov F

low (kcfs)

0

2

4

6

8

10

LOP Total DischargeLOP Spill

Effects of Dam Operations – HCREffects of Dam Operations – HCR

Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions

Month (2012)

May Jun Jul Aug Sep

Flow

(kcfs)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

HCR Total DischargeHCR Spill

Month (2013)

May Jul Sep Nov Jan

Flow

(kcfs)0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

HCR Total DischargeHCR Spill

Effects of Dam Operations – DetroitEffects of Dam Operations – Detroit

Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions

Month (2012)

Aug Sep Oct Nov

Flow

(kcfs)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

Detroit Total DischargeDetroit Spill

Month (2013)

Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov

Flow

(kcfs)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

Detroit Total DischargeDetroit Spill

N=15

N=837

Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions

Lookout Point Reservoir entry, naturally-produced Chinook (Romer et al. 2012)

PIT 2011 (64 mm)PIT 2012 (62 mm)PIT 2013 (68 mm)PIT 2014 (74 mm)

Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions

Detroit Reservoir entry, naturally-produced Chinook (Romer et al. 2012)

N = 4,249

N = 27

PIT 2012 (90 mm)PIT 2013 (65 mm)PIT 2014 (74 mm)

Movement Rate– MFWMovement Rate– MFWIntroduction Methods Results Summary Questions

Release Year

Release Location

Dexter TR LOP TR FB HOR HCR

2011 5.38A n/a n/a 6.16A n/a

2012 5.82A n/a n/a 4.70B 0.99C

2013 6.20A n/a 3.56B 3.80C 0.97D

2014 6.95A 2.68B 2.76B 2.88B n/a

Movement Rate– NSMovement Rate– NSIntroduction Methods Results Summary Questions

Release Year

Release Location

TR FB HOR

2012 9.48A n/a 7.77B

2013 1.49A 1.68A 1.31B

2014 2.35A 2.51A 2.21B

Growth– MFWGrowth– MFWIntroduction Methods Results Summary Questions

Release Year

Release Location

Dexter TR LOP TR FB HOR HCR

2011 0.65A n/a n/a 0.73B n/a

2012 0.31A n/a n/a 0.97B 0.69B

2013 0.47A n/a 0.89B 0.90B 0.64A

2014 0.17A 0.33A 0.82B 0.86C n/a

Growth– NSGrowth– NS

Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions

Release Year

Release Location

TR FB HOR

2012 0.17A n/a 0.78B

2013 n/a 0.71A 0.68B

2014 n/a 0.81A 0.80A