1. Tim Copeland and June Johnson Idaho Department of Fish & Game Idaho Natural Production Monitoring & Evaluation Project 1991-073-00

2. Project history Recent results Future directions Todays Agenda

3. The 1980s Idaho Habitat Evaluation for Offsite Mitigation Record (1983-007-00) Focus on Idahos wild/natural spring/summer Chinook (Steelhead, too!) General monitoring –Parr & redd counts, relate to habitat Intensive monitoring –Survival & production at 2 sites

4. General Parr Monitoring

5. Chinook Adult Escapement

6. The 1990s Salmon declines & ESA listing General monitoring continued Mitigation & habitat monitoring? Intensive studies changed to ESU Focus on downstream passage Project data proved very important

7. Chinook Spawning Ground Surveys Index Area Counts

8. Spawner to Parr (Hall-Griswold & Petrosky 2002)

9. Spawner to Spawner (Hall-Griswold & Petrosky 2002) Chinook Steelhead

10. Chinook Recruit/Spawner Analysis Schaller et al. 1999

11. Chinook Life Cycle Survival

12. Project Benefits Excellent trend data set Lots of mileage and publications Project reports highly cited in regional forums (e.g. PATH & CRI) Also some site-specific survival & productivity estimates

13. Wild Snake River Chinook & Steelhead Monitor population status & trends Measure freshwater production Effects of habitat projects Estimate stage-specific survival 2001-2003 Objectives

14. Production & Survival Natural chinook smolts/female for basin –Lower Granite Dam data Age structure of chinook adult returns to basin –Length frequency analysis at Lower Granite Dam Natural smolt-adult return rate for basin –Lower Granite Dam data –PTAGIS data

15. Chinook Freshwater Production Stock-Recruit Analysis

16. Smolt Forecast

17. How well did the model perform? Predicted Observed After 2003 smolt migration

18. Steelhead PIT Tagging

19. Steelhead Tagging Results Migratory Year Number Tagged Smolts Detected 199971951200 200065251330 200174301708 20025395830 20037040987 Average67171211

20. Basinwide Steelhead Trends

21. Specific Migration Timing

22. Chinook Fin ray aging & SARs Discrepancy between PIT tag returns and scales Length at Age x LGR Length Frequency = Length at Age for entire Snake River ESU Assign returns back to correct brood year

23. Collection Sites

24. Fin Rays >97% Accuracy

25. 2003 Carcass Length at Age Ages

26. 2003 Proportion of Carcass Length at Age Ocean Age FL (cm)1234 <501.000.00 50-541.000.00 55-591.000.00 60-641.000.00 65-690.140.860.00 70-740.000.910.090.00 75-790.000.900.100.00 80-840.000.810.190.00 85-890.000.240.760.00 90-940.000.070.920.01 95-990.00 0.960.04 100-1040.00 0.980.02 >1040.00 1.000.00

27. Video at LGR Counting Window

28. 2003 LGR Length Frequency

29. Assigning Ages Carcass Length at Age data X Lower Granite Dam lengths of entire run = Length at Age for entire Snake River wild/natural spring/summer adult chinook salmon X The total number of wild chinook passing Lower Granite Dam (supplied by TAC) = Total Number of Chinook in each Smolt Migration Yr.

30. Chinook Smolt-to-adult Return Rates Smolt Migratory Year 1996199719981999200020012002 Smolts 419,826161,157599,1591,560,2981,344,382500,7001,173,566 Adult Returns 1-ocean--189235149612274633203 2-ocean9972155692528,16820,21911,737-- 3-ocean45640883317,22822,408-- 4-ocean022390571-- Total14532774838330,23543,85412,2003203 SAR (%)0.351.721.403.043.262.440.27

31. Summary to Date Maintain large trend data sets Large-scale empirical productivity models Habitat data not well-integrated PIT tagging for steelhead passage studies Highly accurate population age data Tissue archive from carcasses Sampling not representative

32. Where do we go now?

33. Changing Needs Augment trend sites Population-specific data –Genetic & demographic information System-wide compatibility

34. Chinook Metapopulation Structure

35. Future Directions Evaluate current tasks & data Analyze genetic archive Incorporate probabilistic design Explore processes & scales appropriate for management Develop collaborative relationships