Frank Leonetti, Snohomish County Biological Monitoring in the Lake Washington/Cedar/Sammamish Watershed (WRIA 8): Results of “fish in/fish out” monitoring Sarah McCarthy, WRIA 8 Hans Berge, King County Frank Leonetti, Snohomish County

Lake Washington/ Cedar/Sammamish Watershed Tiered approach to prioritization of habitat actions. Subbasins were placed into 3 tiers based on watershed condition and level of use by Chinook salmon: Core/migratory Satellite Episodic/None

“Fish In/Fish Out” Monitoring Objectives: Document the Status and Trends in VSP parameters Compare to Plan “targets” and Adaptive Management goals for populations Improve understanding of those habitat factors affecting Chinook Estimate Chinook response to restoration actions Are multiple actions cumulatively affecting habitat conditions and fish populations? Monitoring of multiple Chinook life stages is essential! Primary life stages to monitor: Adult spawners Juvenile migrants from streams Juvenile migrants through the lakes & migratory corridors Smolt use of nearshore marine areas

Viable Salmonid Population (VSP) Interdependent parameters for evaluating viability: Abundance How many fish are there at various life stages? Productivity Is the population growing? Distribution Don't put all your fish in one stream Diversity How many life history strategies are present?

VSP Parameters Monitoring Program Abundance Productivity Distribution Diversity Spawner Surveys Adult counts, Redd counts Estimates of total eggs, Prespawning mortality Relative use of streams and rivers in core, satellite and episodic areas Age structure, Hatchery or Natural origin

VSP Parameters Monitoring Program Abundance Productivity Distribution Diversity Spawner Surveys Adult counts, Redd counts Estimates of total eggs, Prespawning mortality Relative use of streams and rivers in core, satellite and episodic areas Age structure, Hatchery or Natural origin Fry/Smolt Trapping Juvenile abundance Egg to smolt survival (%) Relative comparison of Bear vs. Cedar Fry vs. smolt numbers, migration timing

VSP Parameters Monitoring Program Abundance Productivity Distribution Diversity Spawner Surveys Escapement, Redd counts Estimates of total eggs, Prespawning mortality Relative use of streams and rivers in core, satellite and episodic areas Age structure, Hatchery or Natural origin Fry/Smolt Trapping Juvenile abundance Egg to smolt survival (%) Relative comparison of Bear vs. Cedar Fry vs. smolt numbers, migration timing PIT-Tag Migration survival estimates Relative use and importance of migration areas Migration timing to ocean

Abundance Chinook Sockeye Live Counts Redds

Presence of Hatchery Fish on Spawning Grounds Adipose Fin Photos from NMT website: http://www.nmt-inc.com

Length, Age, and Pre-Spawn Mortality

Juvenile Trapping Photo: WDFW

Map from WDFW

Photo: WDFW

PIT-tag Detectors at Locks Photo: WDFW

Adult Abundance: Escapement Estimate Cedar Escapement Goal Bear/Cottage Goal 2007

Adult Abundance & Distribution: Redds & Landsburg Passage Escapement graphs

Proportion of Hatchery Fish on Spawning Grounds

Age of Hatchery vs. Natural Origin Spawners (Females only)

Pre-Spawn Mortality

Program 2 – Fry/Smolt Trapping Abundance - Total “fish out” Productivity - What do we mean? Survival from life stage to life stage Full life cycle survival Population replacement Diversity – Life history strategies Distribution – …..not so much

Cedar River Abundance – Wide range in Fry production & variable by year Smolt production is less variable and has increased since 1998, except recently Jan-April small fry (45mm) migration with later (May-June) larger smolt (60-100mm) migration

Cedar River Figure matches #redds with #smolts produced Big differences in 2000 and 2006 “Resilience” effects (2000) and “Resistance to Catastrophe” (2006)

One Productivity Estimate Lifecycle estimate - redds to redds

Monitoring data analysis & AM framework VSP Parameters Abundance Productivity Distribution Diversity Targets Escapement goal Cedar: 1250 Bear/Cottage: 350 Increase juvenile and smolt survival (2x), Increase adult returns per spawner (1-3) Expand spawning area distribution; Convert satellite to core area Increase Cedar instream rearing; Improve Samammish to support smolt rearing Indicators Juvenile abundance Egg to smolt survival (%), Redd counts Relative comparison of Bear vs. Cedar, Redd surveys Fry vs. smolt numbers, migration timing Current Performance Yes/No Met escapement goal on Cedar in 2007. % survival, Redd:Redd estimates Relative use and importance of migration areas Migration timing to locks Past Trend/ Future Expectation Increasing/ Decreasing >1 increasing ? Evaluation of vsp parameters compared to targets

Summary – Cedar River Chinook escapement in 2007 was relatively high. 2008 should be relatively high barring strong ocean effects 2009 should be weak – uncertainty is on Ocean effects; 2010 improved; 2011 high returns Spring 2008 outmigration should be highest on record since 1991. Future expectations based on improved understanding of flow effects on survival, productivity of recolonization group, smolt versus fry abundance, effects from hatchery and harvest, and strong Ocean influence.

Importance Chinook life history requires consistent long-term annual monitoring to understand status and trends in population dynamics in order to compare to goals for recovery. Predictive relationships between fish in and fish out data will help devise possible future management actions based on expected fish performance years ahead of time.