Restoration Actions and Juvenile Coho Rearing Habitat

1
Restoration Actions and Juvenile Coho Rearing
Habitat

• Research Design and One Year of Data

John Hannon Mark Bowen Katherine Potak
Zehfuss Nina Hemphill Robert Chase Richard Corwin
2
Objectives

• Determine effects of restoration actions on
  juvenile coho by comparing treatment and
  reference sites
• Coho densities
• Site fidelity
• Habitat use
• Growth
• Food availability

3
Outline

• Research Design
• Methods
• Juvenile coho growth
• Coho densities
• Site fidelity
• Food availability
• Habitat use

4
Research Design

• We selected a Reference and Treatment site at
  each of two restoration action locations.
• Cemetery Hole Side Channel (RM 109) was
  constructed in the 1980s. It is the first
  treatment.
• Old Lewiston Bridge (RM 110) is a main channel
  reference site 1 mile upstream.
• Pear Tree Constructed Alcove (RM 73) was built in
  2006. This site is the second treatment location.
• Lime Point (RM 74.5) is a main channel reference
  site. It is 1.5 mi. upstream of the Pear Tree
  Constructed Alcove.

5
Research Design

• At each of Reference and Treatment site we will
  collect information regarding coho habitat.
• Then statistical comparisons between the
  Reference and Treatment data will provide insight
  into the differences, if any, that now exist.
• Comparisons will include
• Physical data depth, velocity, substrate,
  distance to cover, and cover type
• Drift samples to estimate food availability
• Coho density data from snorkel counts
• Coho length and weight
• Coho recaptures from PIT tagging growth rate can
  be calculated for these fish

6
(No Transcript)
7
Reference
Treatment
8
Reference
Treatment
9
Treatment 1 Constructed Side Channel
Treatment
Lewiston Cemetery Side Channel
Reference
Old Lewiston Bridge Run on River Left
10
Treatment 2 Constructed Alcove
Treatment
before construction Pear Tree after
construction
Reference
Lime Point
11
Methods

• Fish capture
• Fish tagging
• Food availability
• GIS habitat use and availability mapping
• Fish density
• Bioenergetics modeling

12
Fish Captured in Minnow Traps
Bait
13
Fish Tagged
Passive Integrated Transponder (PIT) tags
Visual Implant Elastomer
14
Food Availability
Surface drift net set
Bottom drift net set
15
Habitat Use and Availability

• Habitat Availability measurements
• Depth
• Velocities
• Cover
• shear
• Substrate
• turbidity

• Habitat use quantified by
• Snorkeling
• Minnow trapping
• Seining
• Mapped

16
Bioenergetics Modeling

• Calculate energy acquired per unit time
• Drift rates provide food availability,
• selectivity for various sizes of food energy
  acquired
• velocity of feeding positons provided food
  delivery rate
• Calculate energetic costs
• Temperature
• Egestion and excretion
• Standard Metabolism
• Apparent Heat Increment
• Activity (includes swimming)
• Growth and Reproduction

17
Bioenergetics Modeling

• Et Ee Es Eh Ea Eg
• where
• Et total energy input,
• Ee energy lost through egestion and
  excretion,
• Es energy required for standard metabolism,
• Eh energy required for apparent heat
  increment,
• Ea energy expended through activity,
• Eg surplus power, the energy available for
  growth and reproduction.

18
(No Transcript)
19
(No Transcript)
20
(No Transcript)
21
Coho Growth in treatment and reference reaches
Treatment constructed side channel
Reference main channel glide
N 626
N 303
22
(No Transcript)
23
(No Transcript)
24
Condition Factors, Wild coho
25
(No Transcript)
26
(No Transcript)
27
(No Transcript)
28
Site Fidelity for PIT Coho

• Cemetery Side Channel, 526
• 14 (2.7) recaptures, all wild, all from there
• Lewiston Old Bridge, 806
• 28 (3.5) recaptures (1 hatchery) from there
• 1 recaptured at Cemetery Side Channel
• 1 recaptured at Willow Creek RST
• Downstream Pair of SitesNO Recaps

29
(No Transcript)
30
(No Transcript)
31
(No Transcript)
32
(No Transcript)
33
(No Transcript)
34
Sticklebacks.do they play a role?
35
Velocity Shear

• Velocity Shear V1-V2/d
• Where
• V1 Velocity at the feeding location
• V2 Velocity at the focal point(nose of the
  fish)
• d distance between V1 and V2.

36
Preliminary Findings

• Coho more abundant upstream
• Wild coho display more site fidelity than
  hatchery coho
• Site fidelity occurred only at upstream sites
• Coho Density higher in reference in summer and in
  treatment in wintervery preliminary
• Growth slightly greater in side channel compared
  to main channel...but not significant
• Hatchery coho appear to grow faster and have
  higher condition factor when in hatchery

37
Future Research, 2007

• Perform stomach content analysis
• More emphasis on naturally produced fish
• Add a new site pair in Dark Gulch? Area
• Automated PIT reading stations

38
Thank you Pat Garrison Wade Sinnen Trinity River
Hatchery Tim Hayden Aaron Martin Paul Petros Joe
Pinnix Seth Naman Joel Chase Brian Jordan Eric
Matilton Thomas Masten
39
(No Transcript)