1. U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Evaluation of Alternative Commercial Fishing Gear in the Lower Columbia River, 2013: Behavior and Movement Patterns of Chinook Salmon and Coho Salmon Tobias Kock and Theresa Liedtke February 24, 2014

2. Objectives Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions 1. Describe movement patterns of radio-tagged tule Chinook salmon, bright Chinook salmon, and coho salmon after capture in a beach seine or purse seine. 2.Describe and quantify intended locations of tagged fish. 3.If possible, assess survival of tagged fish after capture.

3. Radiotelemetry Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions  Sample size target = 100 fish/group Species Beach seinePurse seine Fisher 1Fisher 2Fisher 3Fisher 4 Tule Chinook salmon100 Bright Chinook salmon100 Coho salmon100 0 2003004000 100 200300400 Number of Fish Half 95% c.i.

4. Radiotelemetry Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions  Sample size target = 100 fish/group  Each fish tagged with: (a)radio transmitter (i) detected with telemetry receiver (ii) tag recovery report (b)PIT-tag 3-volt model: coho salmon 7-volt model: Chinook salmon

5. Radiotelemetry Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions  Sample size target = 100 fish/group  Each fish tagged with: (a)radio transmitter (i) detected with telemetry receiver (ii) tag recovery report (b)PIT-tag  Monitoring techniques: (a)fixed sites (b)mobile tracking (c)PIT-tag array (d)tag recovery reports

6. Fixed Sites Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions = fixed sites = fish collection/tagging reach F

7. Fixed Sites Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions Fish ladders Forebay Tailrace/Tanner Cr.

8. Fixed Sites Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions McCord Cr./Moffett Cr. Hamilton Cr. Dodson/Skamania Landing Woodward Cr.

9. Fixed Sites Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions Washougal Lady Island

10. Mobile Tracking Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions 3 reaches (1)Bonneville to Cape Horn (2) Cape Horn to Washougal (3) Washougal to mouth of Willamette River Bonneville Dam Cape Horn Washougal I-205 Bridge I-5 Bridge Schedule August – September: daily October: 5 d/week; none during 10/1-10/16 November: 5 total events

11. Tagging Numbers Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions Species Beach seinePurse seine Fisher 1Fisher 2Fisher 3Fisher 4 Tule Chinook salmon100/92100/84100/66100/91 Bright Chinook salmon100/120100/118100/150100/118 Coho salmon100/153100/57100/106100/59 SpeciesBeach seinePurse seineTotal Tule Chinook salmon176157333 Bright Chinook salmon238268506 Coho salmon210165375 Total =6245901,214

12. Detections Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions  Telemetry detections:  99% of the tule Chinook salmon (TCHK) detected  98% of the bright Chinook salmon (BCHK) detected  92% of the coho salmon (COHO) detected n = 1 n = 9 n = 30

13. Detections Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions  Telemetry detections:  99% of the tule Chinook salmon (TCHK) detected  98% of the bright Chinook salmon (BCHK) detected  92% of the coho salmon (COHO) detected  PIT-tag detections:  46% TCHK detected  63% BCHK detected  59% COHO detected

14. Detections Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions  Telemetry detections:  99% of the tule Chinook salmon (TCHK) detected  98% of the bright Chinook salmon (BCHK) detected  92% of the coho salmon (COHO) detected  PIT-tag detections:  46% TCHK detected  63% BCHK detected  59% COHO detected  Tag recoveries:  27% TCHK  19% BCHK  16% COHO

15. Detections Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions  Telemetry detections:  99% of the tule Chinook salmon (TCHK) detected  98% of the bright Chinook salmon (BCHK) detected  92% of the coho salmon (COHO) detected  PIT-tag detections:  46% TCHK detected  63% BCHK detected  59% COHO detected  Tag recoveries:  27% TCHK  19% BCHK  16% COHO  Spit tags  0 TCHK  0 BCHK  13 COHO

16. Detection Probabilities and Spit Tags Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions  Upstream telemetry detections  99.3% TCHK  99.3% BCHK  94.4% COHO Washougal Release Bonneville

17. Detection Probabilities and Spit Tags Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions  Upstream telemetry detections  99.3% TCHK  99.3% BCHK  94.4% COHO Washougal Release Bonneville  Downstream telemetry detections  97.7% TCHK  99.1% BCHK  90.2% COHO

18. Detection Probabilities and Spit Tags Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions  Upstream telemetry detections  99.3% TCHK  99.3% BCHK  94.4% COHO  Downstream telemetry detections  97.7% TCHK  99.1% BCHK  90.2% COHO  Bonneville PIT-tag detections  95.2% TCHK  97.1% BCHK  95.9% COHO Washougal Release Bonneville

19. Travel Times Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions Release to Bonneville Dam Release to Cascade Locks Release to Washougal

20. Behavior and Movement Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions Bonneville Dam Washougal Release site 1 2 3 5 4 6 Passed dam Remained in study area Downstream of Washougal

21. Behavior and Movement by Origin Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions Bonneville Dam Washougal TCHK 29% 44%26% BCHK 15% 62% 21% COHO 26% 53% 14%

22. Behavior and Movement by Origin Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions Bonneville Dam Washougal TCHK 29% 44%26% BCHK 15% 62% 21% COHO 26% 53% 14% Total = 88 Wild = 43 Hatchery = 45 Total = 105 Wild = 68 Hatchery = 37 Total = 51 Wild = 30 Hatchery = 21 Total = 97 Wild = 38 Hatchery = 59 Total = 147 Wild = 55 Hatchery = 92 Total = 77 Wild = 49 Hatchery = 28 Total = 97 Wild = 34 Hatchery = 63 Total = 312 Wild = 195 Hatchery = 117 Total = 197 Wild = 151 Hatchery = 46

23. Treatment vs Control Groups Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions

24. Treatment vs Control Groups Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions All Fish TCHK: 333 BCHK: 506 COHO: 375 WA Ladder TCHK: 89 BCHK: 114 COHO: 114 WA Ladder TCHK: 87% BCHK: 89% COHO: 79% All Fish TCHK: 44% BCHK: 62% COHO: 53% Fate above the dam

25. Intended Migratory Locations Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions TributaryMainstem Columbia RiverHatchery Wells Dam: 1 (<1 percent) Rocky Reach Dam: 2 (<1 percent) Priest Rapids Dam: 3 (<1 percent)Priest Rapids Hatchery: 3 (<1 percent) Yakima River: 1 (<1 percent)Hanford Reach: 1 (<1 percent)Ringold Hatchery: 1 (<1 percent) Snake River: 3 (1 percent) McNary Dam: 10 (3 percent) Deschutes River: 4 (1 percent)Zone 6: 11 (3 percent) The Dalles Dam: 2 (<1 percent) Klickitat River: 3 (<1 percent) Spring Creek Hatchery: 17 (5 percent) Little White Salmon River: 4 (1 percent)Cascade Locks: 51 (15 percent) Wind River: 1 (<1 percent)Bonneville Dam Forebay: 15 (4 percent) Herman Creek: 2 (<1 percent)Bonneville Dam: 4 (1 percent) Bonneville Hatchery: 30 (9 percent) Tanner Creek: 5 (1 percent) Oneonta Creek: 1 (<1 percent)Zone 5: 53 (16 percent) Multnomah Creek: 3 (<1 percent) Number of fish released = 333 Not detected = 1 (<1 percent) Zone 4: 56 (17 percent) Washougal River: 9 (3 percent) Sandy River: 10 (3 percent) Willamette River: 2 (<1 percent) Lewis River: 5 (1 percent)Zone 3: 6 (2 percent) Cowlitz River: 7 (2 percent)Zone 2: 6 (2 percent) TCHK

26. Tributaries Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions TCHKBCHKCOHO Yakima R. (1)Methow R. (1)Wenatchee R. (1) Snake R. (3)Snake R. (10)Yakima R. (1) Deschutes R. (4)Umatilla R. (3)Snake R. (1) Klickitat R. (3)Deschutes R. (4)Umatilla R. (2) Little White Salmon R. (4)Klickitat R. (4)Deschutes R. (2) Wind R. (1)White Salmon R. (1)Klickitat R. (13) Herman Cr. (2)Little White Salmon R. (14)Hood R. (1) Tanner Cr. (5)Herman Cr. (1)Little White Salmon R. (1) Oneonta Cr. (1)Moffett Cr. (2)Herman Cr. (1) Multnomah Cr. (3) Tanner Cr. (4) Washougal R. (9)Washougal R. (4)Hamilton Cr. (2) Sandy R. (10)Sandy R. (3)Moffett Cr. (1) Willamette R. (2)Willamette R. (3)Oneonta Cr. (3) Lewis R. (5)Lewis R. (1)Multnomah Cr. (1) Cowlitz R. (7)Cowlitz R. (3)Washougal R. (3) Sandy R. (5) Clackamas R. (1) Lewis R. (6)

27. Mainstem Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions TCHKBCHKCOHO Wells Dam (1)Wells Dam (6) Rocky Reach Dam (2)Rocky Reach Dam (5) Priest Rapids Dam (3)Rock Island Dam (3) Hanford Reach (1)Priest Rapids Dam (16) McNary Dam (10)Hanford Reach (3) Zone 6 (11)McNary Dam (50)McNary Dam (5) The Dalles Dam (2)Zone 6 (12)Zone 6 (8) Cascade Locks (51)The Dalles Dam (22)The Dalles Dam (7) Bonneville Dam Forebay (15)Cascade Locks (86)Cascade Locks (105) Bonneville Dam (4)Bonneville Dam Forebay (9)Bonneville Dam Forebay (33) Zone 5 (53)Bonneville Dam (3)Bonneville Dam (40) Zone 4 (56)Zone 5 (56)Zone 5 (29) Zone 3 (6)Zone 4 (106)Zone 4 (38) Zone 2 (6)Zone 3 (5)Zone 3 (1) Zone 2 (1)

28. Hatcheries Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions TCHKBCHKCOHO Priest Rapids Hatchery (3)Priest Rapids Hatchery (34)Dworshak Hatchery (1) Ringold Hatchery (1)Ringold Hatchery (7) Spring Creek Hatchery (17)Spring Creek Hatchery (1) Bonneville Hatchery (30)Bonneville Hatchery (18)Bonneville Hatchery (29)

29. Survival Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions Slide 20Slide 22Slide 9 Fast travel times Substantial #’s downstream Limited downstream monitoring Don’t Use Survival Model

30. Probable Survival Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions Detection historyAlive Alive or dead Fish moved upstream and arrived at, or passed Bonneville Dam x Fish was harvested in a fishery x Fish returned to a hatchery x Fish entered a spawning tributary x Fish was observed moving > 4 d after release x Fish was recovered dead < 4 d of release x Fish was not observed moving > 4 d after release x Fish was never detected x

31. Probable Survival Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions TCHK Description Beach seinePurse seine Overall Elapsed time from release Overall Elapsed time from release < 4 d> 4 d< 4 d> 4 d Arrived at, or passed Bonneville Dam49% (87)157245% (71)2447 Harvested in fishery7% (13)3105% (8)35 Returned to hatchery10% (17)3148% (13)112 Entered a tributary13% (22)12111% (17)116 Observed moving > 4 d after release14% (25)02519% (30)030 Total fish that survived capture93% (164)2214289% (139)29110 Not moving > 4 d after release6% (11)11011% (18)180 Confirmed mortality000000 Not detected1% (1)10000 Total fish that may not have survived7% (12)12011% (18)180

32. Probable Survival Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions BCHK Description Beach seinePurse seine Overall Elapsed time from release Overall Elapsed time from release < 4 d> 4 d< 4 d> 4 d Arrived at, or passed Bonneville Dam60% (142)3211070% (188)40148 Harvested in fishery3% (8)26 17 Returned to hatchery3% (8)082% (6)06 Entered a tributary3% (7)162% (6)06 Observed moving > 4 d after release17% (41)04112% (32032 Total fish that survived capture87% (206)3517190% (240)41199 Not moving > 4 d after release11% (27)2709% (23)230 Confirmed mortality<1% (1)10000 Not detected2% (4)402% (5)50 Total fish that may not have survived13% (32)32010% (28)280

33. Probable Survival Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions COHO Description Beach seinePurse seine Overall Elapsed time from release Overall Elapsed time from release < 4 d> 4 d< 4 d> 4 d Arrived at, or passed Bonneville Dam62% (130)785258% (96)4947 Harvested in fishery2% (5)321% (2)20 Returned to hatchery9% (18)2167% (12)210 Entered a tributary8% (16)4125% (9)09 Observed moving > 4 d after release4% (8)088% (13)013 Total fish that survived capture84% (177)879080% (132)5379 Not moving > 4 d after release8% (17)17012% (19)190 Confirmed mortality000000 Not detected8% (16)1608% (12)140 Total fish that may not have survived16% (33)33020% (33)330

34. Fisher Differences Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions Description Beach seinePurse seine Fisher 1Fisher 2Fisher 3Fisher 4 Tule Chinook salmon Probable survivors85 (92%)79 (94%)59 (89%)80 (88%) Unknown fate7 (8%)5 (6%)7 (11%)11 (12%) Fisher’s exact test result =p = 0.769p = 0.806 Bright Chinook salmon Probable survivors105 (88%)101 (85%)131 (87%)109 (92%) Unknown fate14 (12%)18 (15%)19 (13%)9 (8%) Fisher’s exact test result =p = 0.569p = 0.228 Tule Chinook salmon Probable survivors135 (88%)42 (74%)91 (86%)41 (70%) Unknown fate18 (12%)15 (26%)15 (14%)18 (30%) Fisher’s exact test result =p = 0.018p = 0.015

35. Behavior of Questionable Fish Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions

36. Behavior of Questionable Fish Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions SpeciesBehavior groupBeach seinePurse seine Tule Chinook salmon1118 Upstream only (2)12 Upstream, then downstream (3)00 Downstream (4)10 Upstream, then downstream, passed Washougal (5)02 Downstream, then passed Washougal (6)914 Bright Chinook salmon2723 Upstream only (2)20 Upstream, then downstream (3)00 Downstream (4)02 Upstream, then downstream, passed Washougal (5)01 Downstream, then passed Washougal (6)2520 Coho salmon1719 Upstream only (2)34 Upstream, then downstream (3)00 Downstream (4)13 Upstream, then downstream, passed Washougal (5)01 Downstream, then passed Washougal (6)1311

37. Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions  Many fish didn’t pass Bonneville Dam  55% TCHK  36% BCHK  37% COHO Overview of Study

38. Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions  Many fish didn’t pass Bonneville Dam  55% TCHK  36% BCHK  37% COHO  TRT and CON differences Overview of Study

39. Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions  Many fish didn’t pass Bonneville Dam  55% TCHK  36% BCHK  37% COHO  TRT and CON differences  Some PIT-tagged fish are missed at Bonneville  95.2% TCHK  97.1% BCHK  95.9% COHO Overview of Study

40. Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions  Effects of Government shutdown  Direct effects on tagging and mobile tracking  However, no apparent data gaps Coho Salmon Uncertainties

41. Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions  Effects of Government shutdown  Direct effects on tagging and mobile tracking  However, no apparent data gaps  Weaker transmitters  Lower detection %  More undetected fish Coho Salmon Uncertainties

42. Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions  Effects of Government shutdown  Direct effects on tagging and mobile tracking  However, no apparent data gaps  Weaker transmitters  Lower detection %  More undetected fish  Higher spit rate Coho Salmon Uncertainties

43. Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions  Effects of Government shutdown  Direct effects on tagging and mobile tracking  However, no apparent data gaps  Weaker transmitters  Lower detection %  More undetected fish  Higher spit rate  Fisher differences  Variable catch  Differences in probable survival Coho Salmon Uncertainties

44. Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions  Effects of Government shutdown  Direct effects on tagging and mobile tracking  However, no apparent data gaps  Weaker transmitters  Lower detection %  More undetected fish  Higher spit rate  Fisher differences  Variable catch  Differences in probable survival  Biology Coho Salmon Uncertainties

45. Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions Survival  Probable survival underestimates true survival

46. Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions Survival  Probable survival underestimates true survival  Estimates are encouraging  89 – 93% TCHK  87 – 90% BCHK  80 – 84% COHO

47. Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions Survival  Probable survival underestimates true survival  Estimates are encouraging  89 – 93% TCHK  87 – 90% BCHK  80 – 84% COHO  2013 data useful for designing future survival studies  Fewer sites: Skamania Landing to Bridge of the Gods  More sites: Mainstem Columbia R. and tributaries downstream of Washougal  High detection probabilities = precise estimates, fewer fish

48. Questions Introduction Methods Results Summary Questions