Chinook Salmon Adult Abundance Monitoring

Project 199703000

Dave Faurot

Nez Perce Tribe

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory

Goal

•Accurately and precisely quantify adult spring and summer chinook salmon spawner abundance in the Secesh River and Lake and Marsh creeks on an annual basis using state-of-the-art technologies

Expected Products:

• Accurate determination of adult abundance• Determination of run timing

• Comparison of abundance numbers with

expanded redd count estimates

• Accurate fish per redd number

• Percent of hatchery strays into Lake and Marsh creeks

Relationships to:: 2000 NMFS Bi OP

• RPA 13 – Information for evaluation checks at 1, 3, 5 and 8 years

• RPA 179 – Assess population status for progress toward ESU recovery goal

• RPA 180 – Tier 2 level population status

• RPA 184 – Population status monitoring

• RPA 193 – Investigation of state-of-the-art novel fish detection technologies

Relationships to: Subbasin Summary

Fish and Wildlife Needs

• Non-invasive monitoring technologies 5.4.1

• Improved wild population status information 5.2.3.a

• Adult spawner abundance 5.4.2

• Adult migration patterns 5.4.2

• Run timing 5.2.2.a

• Spawner to spawner ratios 5.4.2

• Population trends 5.2.1

• Listed Stock Escapement Monitoring project 5.3.1

Critical Uncertainty: Population Status

How many fish are there?

“Therefore, more accurate counts of returning adults to natal spawning grounds are necessary to evaluate recovery efforts matrix threshold goals” (NMFS 2000)

Redd Counts:an index of relative abundance

•If the goal is to increase the number of salmon, then the variable of interest is the number of fish (Botkin et al. 2000 – Validation Monitoring).

•Index area redd counts in Idaho were not designed to provide escapement estimates (Kiefer et al. 1996).

Redd count expansions: 2.31 Average SFSR PATH1.18 Weak year class, Lake Creek1.64-6.04 Range, Imnaha River

•Expansions of redd counts to spawner and recruit numbers are influenced by measurement error and uncertainty of assumptions regarding estimates of fish per redd, relative numbers in surveyed and unsurveyed areas, prespawning mortality rates, age composition, hatchery fish contributions, and conversion rates of adults returning through dams and fisheries (Beamesderfer 1998).

ISS Index

ISS Intensive

PATH Intensive

PATH Index

ISS Intensive

PATH Index

PATH Intensive

ISS IndexLake Creek Spawner Abundance

1998 1999

Year

Dif

fere

nce

(%

)

-100

0

100

200

300

Flow

Lake Creek

Monitoring and Evaluation Results

Lake Creek Secesh River

Snorkel 1997 -- No impact

1998 No impact No impact

1999 No impact No impact

Visual 1997 -- No impact

1998 No impact No impact

1999 No impact No impact

Summary of Major Activity in Lake Creek

Activity 1998 1999 2000 2001

First Fish 8 July 11 July >22 June 9 June

Peak Net Up 18 July 20 July 27 Jun 24,28June

Peak Activity 6 Aug 19 Aug 7 Aug 19 Aug

Last Fish 26 Aug 3 Sep 31 Aug

Abundance 52 60 >311 ~615

Fish per redd 1.18 2.88 >1.73

Secesh River Site

Flow

Deep Creek Barrier

Barrier

Sampling area

Transducer

Flow

Marsh Creek

Flow

Vaki