Rachel C. Johnson Cramer Fish Sciences &
University of California Davis
The road to extinction is paved with good intentions:Can hatchery and natural salmon co-exist?
Salmon of the past
Sabertooth salmon, Oncorhynchus rastrosusTwelve million years ago 400 pounds; 8-10 feet in length
Chinook salmon runs
Extinct
At Risk
Special concern
Low or No Risk
Not Evaluated
California salmon in the present
Evolutionarily Significant Units
J A S O N D J F M A M J
Fall run
Adult Spawn Time
Late Fall run
Winter run
Spring run
Steelhead
Data sources: Vogel and Marine, 1991; Hallock, 1983; CDFG, 1993
Candidate
Candidate
Endangered
Threatened
Threatened
California Chinook salmon trend
1850 1950 2000
Year
Estim
ated
spa
wne
r esc
apem
ent
2,000,000
1,000,000
500,000
400,000
300,000
200,000
100,000
Dams
Habitat
Harvest
Hatcheries
Courtesy of Joe Merz, Cramer Fish Sciences
Reliance on hatcheries for harvest
90% ± 6%
wild contribution
2002Barnett-Johnson et al., 2007. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences
Reliance on hatcheries for harvest
Wild (Hatchery)
90% ± 6%
wild contribution
2002Barnett-Johnson et al., 2007. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences
2010 2011
52% 55%
Palmer-Zwahlen and Kormos. 2013. Fisheries Branch Administrative Report
Kormos et al., 2012. Fisheries Branch Administrative Report
‘Optimal’ hatchery releases for harvest
reco
verie
s pe
r 100
,000
rele
ased
Coleman National Fish Hatchery 2011 Ocean Recoveries
Brood years
Bay releasesIn-river releases
Data source: Palmer-Zwahlen & Kormos. 2013
‘Non-Optimal’ consequence to natural salmon
Stray
Coleman National Fish Hatchery 2011 Recovery rates
reco
verie
s pe
r 100
,000
rele
ased
Brood years Brood years
Homing
Bay releasesIn-river releases
Data source: Palmer-Zwahlen & Kormos 2013
Araki et al. 2007 Science
Fitness Effects and Domestication selection
40% reduction in fitness per captive generation
Christie et al. 2012 PNAS
Hatchery fish spawning in the wild… Hatchery fish spawning in hatcheries...
Double lifetime reproductive success compared to wild spawned in captivity
Where do the un-harvested hatchery fish return?
Wild (Hatchery)
Battle CreekMill Creek
Deer Creek
Feather
American
Mokelumne
Stanislaus
Tuolumne
Merced
BAT (CNH)
MIL/DEE
AME (NIH)
MOK (MOH)
STA
TUO
MER (MEH)
FRH (FRH)
Wild (Hatchery)
90% ± 6% 52% 55%
2002 2010 2011
~870,000
Data sources: Barnett-Johnson et al. 2007, Kormos et al. 2012, Palmer-Zwahlen and Kormos. 2013, Grandtab 2013
~160,000 ~230,000
Escapement
Hatchery-origin fish return to hatcheries
2010
Fall run Chinook salmon escapement to hatcheries Data source: Kormos et al. 2013, Palmer-Zwahlen & Kormos. 2013
Coleman
Feather
Nimbus
Mokelumne
Merced
Hatchery origin
Natural origin
Hatchery-origin fish return to hatcheries
2010
Fall run Chinook salmon escapement to hatcheries Data source: Kormos et al. 2013, Palmer-Zwahlen & Kormos. 2013
Coleman
Feather
Nimbus
Mokelumne
Merced
Hatchery origin
Natural origin
Nimbus
Feather
Coleman
Mokelumne
Many hatchery fish spawn in rivers
2010
Hatchery origin
Natural origin
Clear Creek
Upper Sacramento
Butte Creek
Feather River
Yuba River
American River
Mokelumne River
Stanislaus River
Merced River
Tuolumne River
2011
0Hatchery origin
Natural origin
Clear Creek
Upper Sacramento
Butte Creek
Feather River
Yuba River
American River
Mokelumne River
Stanislaus River
Merced River
Tuolumne River
Cottonwood Creek60% 70%
Goal Hatchery Scientific Review Group Criteria
Minimize hatchery-origin spawners in the wild (pHOS)
pHOS < 30%
Maximize natural-origin broodstock in hatchery (pNOB)
pNOB > 10%
Maximize proportionate natural influence (PNI).
pNOB/(pHOS+pNOB) > 50%
Integrated Hatchery Guidelines
2010 2011
Hatchery and RiverPNOB > .10
PHOS <.30
PNI > .50
PNOB > .10
PHOS <.30
PNI > .50
CNFH/Upper Sacramento 0.11 0.46 0.19 .11 0.27 0.29Feather River Hatchery/Feather River 0.05 0.78 0.06 .04 0.90 0.04Nimbus Hatchery/American River 0.21 0.32 0.40 .23 0.66 0.25Mokelumne hatchery/Mokelumne River 0.10 0.73 0.12 .12 0.88 0.02Merced Hatchery/Merced River 0.22 0.78 0.21 .11 0.89 0.11Clear Creek 0.04 0.08 Cottonwood Creek 0.58 Butte Creek 0.11 0.07 Yuba River 0.71 0.65 Stanislaus River 0.50 0.83 Tuolumne River 0.49 0.73
Assessment of California’s hatcheries & rivers
2010 2011
Hatchery and RiverPNOB > .10
PHOS <.30
PNI > .50
PNOB > .10
PHOS <.30
PNI > .50
CNFH/Upper Sacramento 0.11 0.46 0.19 .11 0.27 0.29Feather River Hatchery/Feather River 0.05 0.78 0.06 .04 0.90 0.04Nimbus Hatchery/American River 0.21 0.32 0.40 .23 0.66 0.25Mokelumne hatchery/Mokelumne River 0.10 0.73 0.12 .12 0.88 0.02Merced Hatchery/Merced River 0.22 0.78 0.21 .11 0.89 0.11Clear Creek 0.04 0.08 Cottonwood Creek 0.58 Butte Creek 0.11 0.07 Yuba River 0.71 0.65 Stanislaus River 0.50 0.83 Tuolumne River 0.49 0.73
Assessment of California’s hatcheries & rivers
Extinction risk due to hatchery influence
High risk
Moderate risk
Low risk
In Lindley et al. 2007Generations
Strays from within basin
% H
atch
ery
sp
awne
rs
Interior Columbia Basin Tech. Recovery Team 2005
Generation
Majority of salmon spawn in natural areas
In-river spawners
Grandtab 2013
Hatchery spawners
Years
Nu
mb
er
of
fall-
run
Majority of salmon spawn in natural areas
In-river spawners
Grandtab 2013
Hatchery spawners
Years
Nu
mb
er
of
fall-
run
Cohort replacement rates of natural populationsC
ohor
t re
plac
emen
t
Conclusions
• Off-site releases- harvest vs. straying
• Management scenarios
• HSRG criteria currently unmet for hatcheries
• Identification of hatchery fish
• Hatchery strays contribute to ‘high’ risk of extinction
Thanks!
Special thanks to: Brett Kormos & Melodie Palmer-Zwahlen
California Department of Fish and Wildlife Ocean Salmon Project
Hatchery Scientific Review Group’s Issues/Recommendations (14)
Issue: Off-site releases promote unacceptable levels of straying among populations Recommendation: In-river release of juvenile hatchery production
Issue: Marking/tagging programs are needed for real-time identification of all hatchery Chinook salmonRecommendation: Tag 100% of hatchery production with coded-wire-tags and 25% should be adipose fin-clipped
California Hatchery Review Project, June 2012
Issue: Harvest management of fall-run Chinook salmon should account for productivity of naturally spawning adultsRecommendation: Revise harvest rate to explicitly account for the status and productivity of fall Chinook salmon spawning in natural areas
1.
2.
3.
Genetically distinct ‘ecotypes’ in Lake Washington
Deep-bodied beach type Slender river type
Science 2000
Hatchery-origin fish do return to hatcheries
2010 2011
Fall run Chinook salmon escapement to hatcheries Data source: Kormos et al. 2013, Palmer-Zwahlen & Kormos. 2013
Coleman
Feather
Nimbus
Mokelumne
Merced
Hatchery origin
Natural origin
Coleman
Feather
Nimbus
Mokelumne
Merced
Many hatchery fish spawn in rivers
2010
Hatchery origin
Natural origin
Clear Creek
Upper Sacramento
Butte Creek
Feather River
Yuba River
American River
Mokelumne River
Stanislaus River
Merced River
Tuolumne River
California Chinook salmon trend
1850 1950 2000
Year
Estim
ated
spa
wne
r esc
apem
ent
2,000,000
1,000,000
500,000
400,000
300,000
200,000
100,000
Dams
Habitat
Harvest
Hatcheries
Courtesy of Joe Merz, Cramer Fish Sciences