Changing relationship between reach survival and SAR

1. The Relation Between Juvenile Salmon Hydro-system survival and Adult returnsPreliminary ResultsFish Passage CenterJerry McCannJack TuomikoskiBrandon Chockley

2. Changing relationship between reach survival and SAR Past analyses of juvenile Reach survival have emphasized the “unknown” importance to adult return Recently NOAA has shown “no statistically signficant relation” between juvenile survival and adult return (Smith and Muir ppt to NPCC 2007)—emphasizing instead the relative importance of ocean conditions on SARs (Williams and Scheuerell 2005) (Schaller and Petrosky 2007), used ocean indices to explain variability in S3 and SAR as well as “common year effect”. In another analysis these authors also showed a relation between SAR and WTT at out-migration as surrogate for inriver survival under different ocean productivity levels (Schaller personal comm).

3. FPC approach to juvenile survival vs SAR • Characterized relative ocean productivity/condition for the year of ocean entry for juvenile Snake River yearling Chinook salmon and steelhead • Estimated reach survivals and compared to adult returns under different levels of ocean “productivity/conditions”

4. Ocean Indices Combination of indices described and used by Williams and Scheuerell (2005), Schaller and Petrosky (2007 & unpublished) • April upwelling -Monthly upwelling indices as measured at Lat. 45°N, 125 W (Near Columbia mouth). Units are cubic meters/second/100 meters of coastline. NOAA Pacific Fisheries Environmental Laboratory at the following link: www.pfeg.noaa.gov/products/PFEL/modeled/indices/upwelling/upwelling.html • May PDO -The Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) Index is defined as the leading principal component of North Pacific monthly sea surface temperature variability (poleward of 20N for the 1900-93 period) http://jisao.washington.edu/pdo/. (Joint Institute for the Study of the Atmosphere and Ocean) • September PDO • October upwelling

5. Regime Shift • Limited years considered in ocean data set to time period after regime shift in 1976-77 identified by Hare and Mantua 2000

6. Developed ranking system to categorize relative ocean productivity/condition by year • Each index was divided into thirds over 30 year span • Each third of data was used as a category to “score” ocean year

7. Summarizing the logic used to classify each year

8. Example of categorization method • 1999 categorized as “good” 3-rank “good” (3), 1-rank “mod.” (2)

9. Results of rankings Years listed would be associated with year of juvenile salmon outmigration

10. Reach Survival and SAR • Estimated LGR to Bonneville and LGR to McNary Reach Survival from 1998 to 2005 • Divided each year into 4-two week blocks based on passage timing at LGR Dates at LGR 4/8 to 4/21, 4/22 to 5/5, 5/6 to 5/19, 5/20 to 6/2 • Estimated SAR based on each two-week interval each year

11. Juvenile Reach Survival • CJS method, with addition of LGS detections of fish undetected at LGR added based on travel time LGR to LGS S1 = (m2+z2(R2/r2))/R1 S1 = Survival LGR to LGS R1 = fish released or detected at LGR m2 = fish detected at LGS z2 = detects of fish not detected at LGS R2 = fish released at LGS, either having been detected at LGR or first time detects at LGS r2 = subsequent detections of fish released at LGS • This greatly increased sample sizes to provide better precision in reach survivals as well as greater likelihood of getting estimates of juvenile survival in 2-week blocks

12. Estimate of SAR • Calculated smolt to adult returns from LGR to LGR • Adjusted initial number of fish detected at LGR to account for transport removals at LGS and LMN and for additional first-time detects at LGS (R2 from example) • Used method of calculating LGR equivalents described in CSS 10 year report (Schaller et al 2007)

13. Starting juvenile population at LGR • LGS Releases expressed in LGR equivalents R2 = R2x11+ R2x01 - t2 S1 = LGR to LGS survival R2lgr-equiv = R2/S1 • LMN removals expressed in LGR equivalents t3/S1S2 • McNary removals expressed in LGR equivalents t4/S1S2S3 • Lower Granite Starting Juvenile population LGRPop = R1+ R2/S1 – t3/S1S2 – t4/S1S2S3

14. LGR to LGR SAR • Adult returns were counted detections at LGR dam • SAR = LGRAR/LGRpop • Jack returns were not included in analysis

15. Results for Yearling Chinook - LGR to BON vs SAR

16. Results for Yearling Chinook - LGR to McN vs SAR

17. Results for Steelhead LGR to BON vs SAR

18. Results for Steelhead – LGR to McN vs SAR

19. Conclusions • Results show strong relation between in-river survival and adult returns at different ocean productivity/conditions levels • Next step: assign in-river environmental variables to reach survival groups (such as FTT, WTT, Spill Pct, Temperature) and analyze in-river effects on SARs at various levels of ocean productivity/conditions

20. References • Hare, S.R. and N.J. Mantua. 2000. Empirical Evidence for North Pacific regime shifts in 1977 and 1989. Progress in Oceanography 47:103-145. • Schaller, H.A., and C.E. Petrosky. 2007. Assessing Hydrosystem Influence on Delayed Mortality of Snake River Stream-type Chinook Salmon. N. Amer. Jour. Fish. Man. 27(3):810-824. • Schaller, H.A., P. Wilson, S. Haeseker, C. Petrosky, E. Tinus, T. Dalton, R. Woodin, E. Weber, N. Bouwes, T. Berggren, J. McCann, S. Rassk, H. Franzoni, and P. McHugh. 2007. COMPARATIVE SURVIVAL STUDY (CSS) of PIT-Tagged Spring/Summer Chinook and Steelhead In the Columbia River Basin, Ten-year Retrospective Summary Report, BPA Contract #s 25634, 25264, 20620, 25247. • Scheuerell, M.D., and J.G. Williams. 2005. Forecasting climate-induced changes in the survival of Snake River spring\summer Chinook salmon. Fisheries Oceanography 14(6):448-457.