1. 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

2. 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

3. “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

4. 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?

5. 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

6. 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

7. 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

8. Abundance
Chinook
Sockeye
Live Counts
Redds

9. Presence of Hatchery Fish on Spawning Grounds
Adipose Fin
Photos from NMT website:

10. Length, Age, and Pre-Spawn Mortality

11. Juvenile Trapping
Photo: WDFW

12. Map from WDFW

13. Photo: WDFW

14. PIT-tag Detectors at Locks
Photo: WDFW

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

16. Adult Abundance & Distribution: Redds & Landsburg Passage
Escapement graphs

17. Proportion of Hatchery Fish on Spawning Grounds

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

19. Pre-Spawn Mortality

20. 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

21. 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

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

23. One Productivity Estimate
Lifecycle estimate - redds to redds

24. 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

25. 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.

26. 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.