Steelhead Stock StatusSteelhead Stock StatusReview and ESAReview and ESA

Oregon Oregon

Rhine MessmerRhine Messmer

ODFW District StaffODFW District StaffOregon Department of Oregon Department of

Fish and WildlifeFish and Wildlife

Pacific Coast Steelhead Management Meeting

Port Townsend, Washington

March 7-9 2006

Winter Steelhead

Summer Steelhead

49 populations49 populations

4 SMU’s4 SMU’s

30 populations30 populations

7 SMU’s7 SMU’s

ESA Status of Oregon

Winter and Summer Steelhead

ESA Status - Winter Steelhead

ESA Status - Summer Steelhead

Coastal – Candidate 1998

Rogue – Not Warranted 2001

Lower Columbia – Threatened 1998

Willamette – Threatened 1999

Coastal – Candidate 1998

Rogue – Not Warranted 2001

Lower Columbia – Threatened 1998

Mid Columbia – Threatened 1999

Snake – Threatened 1997

Upper Snake – No Designation

Klamath – Not Warranted 2001

FMEP Development Winter Steelhead

FMEP DevelopmentSummer Steelhead

Lower Columbia and Willamette– Columbia River, Willamette tribs below Falls, Clackamas and Sandy; Upper Willamette including Molalla , Santiam and Calapooia rivers

Submitted FMEPs (2) in March 2001

Mid Columbia – Deschutes, Walla Walls, John Day, Hood River, Umatilla

• Submitted FMEPs (4) in March 2001

• Revised October 2005 (data updates, dropped wild steelhead harvest on John Day River)

Snake – Grande Ronde/ Imnaha/ Snake River FMEP

•Submitted FMEP in March 2001

Recover and Conservation Plan Development

Summer Steelhead

As part of the TRT/Oregon Plan process, recovery criteria development and assessments are currently underway for populations of steelhead listed under ESA.

The TRT criteria focus of 4 VSP conservation attributes: abundance, productivity, distribution, and diversity.

Viability Curves uses to assess risk of extinction

Mid Columbia – Deschutes, Walla Walls, John Day, Hood River, Umatilla

Snake – Grande Ronde/ Imnaha/ Snake River FMEP

• Draft Recovery Plan for Oregon Middle Columbia River Steelhead January 2006 Progress Report, Richard Carmichael ODFW

Lower Columbia and Willamette

Recovery Plans in developmentPublic review document out late March

Winter Steelhead

Assessment of 473 Fish Populations comprising 69 Species Management Units

Interim Criteria – Six biological characteristics related to species performance

Native Fish Status ReportNative Fish Status ReportPublic DraftPublic Draft

• Key to implementing Key to implementing Oregon’s Native Fish Oregon’s Native Fish Conservation PolicyConservation Policy

• Prioritize conservation plans Prioritize conservation plans & address “at risk” Species & address “at risk” Species Management Units.Management Units.

• Utilizes interim criteria Utilizes interim criteria defined in the Native Fish defined in the Native Fish Conservation Policy.Conservation Policy.

• Conservation risk, not Conservation risk, not extinction risk, of naturally extinction risk, of naturally produced native fish.produced native fish.

• Criteria meant to ensure Criteria meant to ensure conservation until conservation until conservation plan developed conservation plan developed (5 – 10 years).(5 – 10 years).

Interim CriteriaInterim Criteria(In 3 of the last 5 years)(In 3 of the last 5 years)

1.1. Existing PopulationsExisting Populations

2.2. Habitat Use DistributionHabitat Use Distribution

3.3. AbundanceAbundance

4.4. ProductivityProductivity

5.5. Reproductive Reproductive IndependenceIndependence

6.6. HybridizationHybridization

Limited data led us to Limited data led us to interpret the intent of interpret the intent of some of the criteria.some of the criteria.

Coastal Winter Steelhead SMU

Accessible 99%

Inaccessible 1%

Distribution – Pass

Nearly all of the historically-available habitat of this species management unit is still available today (99%).The South Umpqua has lost access to the most habitat of any population and still maintains 94% of historic availability.

Coastal Winter Steelhead SMU

Wild Spawners in the North Umpqua and Salmonberry River (L. Nehalem)

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000

N. U

mp

qu

a (1

000s

)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

L. N

ehalem

(Ad

ults/m

ile)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

N. UmpquaL. Nehalem

Abundance - Pass

Both populations with long-term data passed. Numbers in the North Umpqua have been at or above the interim criterion in most years since 1974. Abundance in the lower Nehalem was above the criterion in four of the last five years. Few indices of abundance are available in other populations within the SMU. Trends in the North Umpqua and Lower Nehalem were assumed to be representative of the SMU.Trapping of adults in mid-coast basins, and spawning surveys in coastal basins in the last two years support the assumption that the North Umpqua and Lower Nehalem are representative of other populations.

Coastal Winter Steelhead SMU

Productivity in Years of Low Abundance

L. Nehalem N. Umpqua

% o

f Y

ears

> 1

.2

0

20

40

60

80

100 All Years Recent Years

Productivity - Pass

Both the North Umpqua and lower Nehalem passed the criterion. These results were assumed to be representative of the SMU.

Coastal Winter Steelhead SMU

Annual Contribution of Hatchery Fish to Natural Spawning in the Alsea

1996 1998 2000 2002 2004

% H

atch

ery

Sp

awn

ers

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Independence - Fail

13 of 23 populations passed this criterion based on trap and hatchery release data. Adult traps in the mid-coast suggest that natural spawning by hatchery fish is above 10% in the Siletz, Alsea and Yaquina. Similar data showed that Siuslaw hatchery fractions are low.Adult trapping and counts at Winchester Dam adjusted for harvest show that hatchery ratios in the Umpqua are low. Creel survey data suggest that hatchery fractions in the Yachats are above the criterion threshold. Assessments in other populations of the North and South Coast were based on the presence (or absence) of hatchery releases.

Coastal Summer Steelhead SMU

Accessible 93%

Inaccessible 7%

Distribution – Pass

All 93% of the historically-available habitat remains accessible.of the habitat within the Siletz remains accessible, and 92% of the habitat within the North Umpqua can still be accessed.

Coastal Summer Steelhead SMU

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000

Nor

th U

mpq

ua (t

hous

ands

)

0

2

4

6

8

10

Siletz

0

200

400

600

800

1000

North UmpquaSiletz

Wild Spawners

Abundance - Pass

Both populations exceeded the minimum abundance criterion in each of the last 5 years. Returns to the North Umpqua have been monitored at Winchester Dam since the 1946-47 run year and numbers have only twice fallen below the interim criterion of 849 spawners. Wild returns to the Siletz increased for six consecutive years prior to the 2004/2005 run year and have now rebounded to levels observed around 1970.

Coastal Summer Steelhead SMU

1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

Rec

ruit

s/Sp

awne

r

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0North Umpqua

Productivity - Fail

The North Umpqua passed the productivity criterion, but the Siletz did not.Productivity in the North Umpqua has been greater than 1.2 in 6 of 11 years of low abundance including 3 of the last 5. Productivity in the Siletz ranged from 0.1 to 1.1 recruits per spawner in the 7 years where data were available. High numbers of hatchery spawners pushed abundance levels beyond the average wild abundance in each of those years raising the possibility of density dependence.

Coastal Summer Steelhead SMU

1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005

% H

atch

ery

Spaw

ners

0

10

20

30

40North Umpqua

Independence - Fail

When accounting for this spatial segregation, hatchery fractions have been between 10 and 35% since 1974. Many hatchery fish that spawn naturally in the North Umpqua do not spawn in areas where wild fish are spawning. Between 1992 and 1999, hatchery fish made up 72-97% of the spawning population in the Siletz. In the Siletz, adult steelhead are trapped at Siletz Falls, which is below the primary spawning grounds. Beginning in 2000, wild fish were selectively passed at Siletz Falls, and hatchery fish were either recycled downstream into the recreational fishery, or were removed from the system.

SummaryOregon’s Native Fish Conservation Policy Oregon’s Native Fish Conservation Policy

Sustainability of native fish Sustainability of native fish

Provide substantial ecological, Provide substantial ecological, economic benefits economic benefits

State of Oregon Recovery Planning not only State of Oregon Recovery Planning not only included ESA recovery requirements but also included ESA recovery requirements but also includes meeting broader social and cultural includes meeting broader social and cultural benefitsbenefits

Greetings from Mark Chilcote