Kootenai River Fisheries
Recovery Investigations
KOOTENAI RIVER ECOSYSTEM REHABILITATION PROJECT
Ecosystem disturbances1) Diking of the river (loss of flood plain connection)2)Channelization and some dredging (loss of habitat diversity)3) Eutrophication4) Mining (possible heavy metals)5) Dam
a. River regulationb. Temperature changesc. Nutrient trapping
Effects On Ecosystem : Nutrients
• Nutrients bind to sediment
river productivity Libby Dam (1972)
• 63% of total P and 25%available N is retained by Libby (Woods 1982)
• 95% trapping efficiencies(Snyder et al. 1996)
Effects On Ecosystem : Primary Production
• Main source of bioenergeticdevelopment of higher trophic levels (Vanote et al. 1980; Allen 1995)
• Kootenai River P/R ratios < 1indicating heterotrophic system (Snyder and Minshall 1996)
• Potential for autotrophicsystem if nutrient levels higher (Snyder and Minshall 1996)
Effects On Ecosystem : Secondary Productivity
• Pre-dam 3,520 insects/ m2
(Bonde and Bush 1972)
• Post-dam 917 insects/ m2
(Snyder and Minshall 1996)
• Lower densities thanother Pacific Northwest systems (Holderman et al. 2000)
Community Type Change
• Degrading ecosystems:fish communities shift to habitat and feeding generalists (Karr 1991, 1995)
(Mylocheilus caurinus)
• Shift from habitat andfeeding specialist occurred in Kootenai River (Paragamian 1994)(Catostomus macrocheilus)
Population Estimates for Hemlock Bar (RKM 265)
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
16000
18000
Mountain Whitefish
Nu
mb
er
of
Fis
h
1980
1981
1993
1994
1998
1999
Are There Solutions?
• Ecosystem rehabilitation is needed to reversedeclining fish populations (Holderman et al. 2001)
• In-river nutrification to stimulate productivity
• Increases in primary production wouldstimulate fish production (Snyder and Minshall 1996)
• Proven to be successfulin fisheries management
Successful Nutrient Enhancement :
Kootenay Lake :
Increase escapement from 300,000 in 1991 to 2.1 million in 1998 (Ashley et al.
1997a)
Arrow Reservoir :
99-00, kokanee abundance increased 4.4 million to 10 million (Holderman et al. 2001)
The Next Step?• Pre-treatment Biomonitoring until 2004
• Currently in feasibility faze:
- Costs
- Application
- Location
- Permitting
- Public
• Tanks treated with 0, 1.5, and 5 µm/L P
Direct effects on fish community?
• Test hatch success and yolk absorption rate of white sturgeon larvae
• Preliminary results: no effect on hatching success
Angler Destination
Kootenai River White Sturgeon Recovery
Investigations
Statement of the problem:The future of Kootenai River white
sturgeon is in jeopardy
Main reasons:
1) Ecosystem and habitat changes
2) Recruitment of wild sturgeon is limited
3) Nutrients may be limiting
4) Stock limitations and population trends
5) Overharvest
Flow during spring freshetlost - sturgeon spawning season
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
1/1 1/31 3/2 4/1 5/1 5/31 6/30 7/30 8/29 9/28 10/28 11/27 12/27
Date
Flo
w (
m3
/s)
1928 - 1972
2002
1973-19901991-2001
Shorty’sIsland
Kootenai River white sturgeonspawning reach rkm 228 to 246
Bonners Ferry
Rkm 228
Rkm 246
Sampling mats were distributed from 1991 through 2001.
Examination of sturgeon eggsto determine age (h) and back calculate spawning date (event)
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
5/1 5/5 5/9 5/13 5/17 5/21 5/25 5/29 6/2 6/6 6/10 6/14 6/18 6/22 6/26 6/30
Date
Flow (
m3/s)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
Temp
eratur
e (oC)
Spawn EpisodeTemperature
Flow
Increasing temperature decreasing flow 18 spawning events
Flow
Temperature
1996
Recommendations
1) Mitigated flows should follow local inflow
2) Maintain flows between630 and 1,200 m3/s
3) Maintain stable or increasingtemperatures - 9.5 - 12.5oC
0.75 km upstream from Myrtle Creek
5
7
11
9
Dep
th, i
n m
e te r
s
Spawning location
Habitat issue a limiting factorSurvival bottleneck
Hatchery juveniles60% S year one90% thereafter
Thousandsof eggs collected
One Larvaecollected
Few wildjuveniles
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
5/7-5/20 5/21-5/27 5/28-6/3 6/4-6/10 6/11-6/17 6/18-6/28
Date category
Nu
mb
er e
gg c
olle
ctio
ns
LowerMiddle
Chi square analysis p<0.01
529.800530.000530.200530.400530.600530.800531.000531.200531.400531.600531.800532.000532.200532.400532.600532.800533.000533.200533.400533.600533.800534.000534.200534.400534.600
5/1
5/5
5/9
5/13
5/17
5/21
5/25
5/29
6/2
6/6
6/10
6/14
6/18
6/22
6/26
6/30
Date
Lak
e el
evat
ion
(m)
225.0
226.0
227.0
228.0
229.0
230.0
231.0
232.0
233.0
234.0
235.0
236.0
237.0
238.0
Riv
er k
ilom
eter
96elev rkm
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 1981 1991
Year
Ele
vatio
n(m
eter
s abo
ve se
a le
vel)
May June
Kootenay Lake elevations
228.0
230.0
232.0
234.0
236.0
238.0
240.0
242.0
244.0
246.0
530.0 530.5 531.0 531.5 532.0 532.5 533.0 533.5 534.0 534.5 535.0 535.5 536.0 536.5 537.0
Median lake elevation (meters)
Med
ian
spaw
n lo
catio
n (r
km)
Historicspawning reach?
0 Section K-18, above Deep CreekLeft Bank
Right Bank
Gravel
M.-C. Sand
F. Sand
Clay
EXPLANATION
Sand
Pre-Libby Dam Lacustrine Clay
GravelGravel
Proper temperature and flowmitigation will enhance white sturgeon spawningbut the issue of spawning location and habitat and survival of eggs and larvaeis still unresolved.
Percent recaptures
0
20
40
60
80Capture probabilit
y (%
)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Estim
ated wild popula
tio
n (1,000's)
0
2
4
6
8
10
4920
167
177
83
12
2 10
230
130 5662
110193 258
180
127165
10914190
N2000 = 760
(95% CI = 430 - 1,090)
N1996 = 1,470
(95%CI = 1,170 - 1,770)
96
Population dynamics
How are we addressing the problem ?
Monitoring and EvaluationSet lining and angling
Egg mats
Larval sampling
Radio and sonic telemetry
Gill netting
Trawling
Monitoring and evaluation
Net and jet program – unite sturgeon with “better” spawning habitat in upper river location
Net and Jet summary:
1) Brought 9 males and 3 females up to hemlock reach (rkm 262.0)
2) All females and 2 males radio and sonic tagged
3) 2 out of 3 females stayed in general area for a week or more
4) 4 eggs found on substrate mats at rkm 262.0 on June 5th. Unable to tell if eggs were fertilized
5) Additional research: pheromone drip station set up at rkm 262.5 to help to keep males in the area of females
Dual beam SONAR (BIOSONICS)
With fixed radio telemetry station
1) Estimate spawning stock
2) More behavioral data
3) Timing of migration
USGS subcontracts
1) Sedimentation transport
why ? We need to know where sedimentation is occurring.
Habitat improvement is futile if done in depositional areas.
2) Acoustic Doppler Current Profiling
why? Sturgeon may be seeking out specific current velocities (versus substrate) and we need to know what these requirements are, and the relationship between lake elevation and micro current velocities (habitat improvement ramifications or larval
stocking).
3) Bathymetric mapping – detailed account of river substrate and depth
Acoustic doppler current profile (ADCP) of Kootenai River
Relationship between lake elevation and micro current velocities
Bathymetry mapping
Where are our best opportunities
to improve spawning habitat?
1) Rehabilitation of historic reach2) Spawning channels/islands constructed in popular spawning locations3) New ideas or thoughts?
Summary
How are we addressing the problems ?
1) Mitigation flows from Libby dam – best possible conditions for successful spawning
2) High tech research from USGS contracts – determine optimal current velocities for spawning and best locations for habitat improvement
3) Net and Jet – unite sturgeon with better habitat, novel ways to promote wild recruitment
4) Depth sensitive telemetry – behavioral data and habitat improvement ramifications
5) Continued monitoring and evaluation – population level
6) Experimental studies – Dual beam SONAR
Kootenai River Rainbow and Bull Trout Research
Rainbow Trout
Last major sport fishery left in the Kootenai River
“The Problem”
The Kootenai River has:
- low density trout population
- low trout catch rates
Hypotheses:
-Recruitment Limited
-High Angling Exploitation
-Nutrient Limited
Objective 1
Quantify rainbow trout recruitment (out-migrants) to the Kootenai River
BonnersFerry
Lake
Cr.Callahan Cr.
MTID
Mo
yie
R.
Kootenai R.
Kootenai R.
Boulder Cr.
Debt Cr.
Caboose Cr.
Star Cr.
Dee
p C
r.
Trail Cr.
Ko
ote
nai R
.
To Kootenay Lake, B. C.
Adfluvial stockMature in Kootenay Lake
Fluvial stockSpawn in Tributaries rear In river
Weekly Catch of Rainbow Trout JuvenilesCallahan Cr. Screw Trap
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Week
Nu
mb
er o
f R
ain
bo
w T
rou
t C
aug
ht
Change in Regulations ???
Kootenai River Trout Regulations
Bag Size Bait Closed
Limit Limit Restrict. Season
2001 6 None None None
2002 2 16” None None
- Protect most fish until they can spawn at least once
- Improve the size structure for a more quality fishery
Bull Trout Life History Investigations
Locations for bull trout 30.160
240.0
250.0
260.0
270.0
280.0
290.0
300.0
310.05/
3/20
02
6/3/
2002
7/3/
2002
8/3/
2002
9/3/
2002
10/3
/200
2
11/3
/200
2
12/3
/200
2
1/3/
2003
2/3/
2003
3/3/
2003
4/3/
2003
5/3/
2003
6/3/
2003
7/3/
2003
Riv
er K
ilo
met
er
O'Brien Cr., MT
Bonners Ferry, ID
ID-MT Border
Kootenai Falls
Locations for bull trout 31.032
210.0
220.0
230.0
240.0
250.0
260.0
270.0
280.0
290.0
300.0
310.0
3/22
/200
1
5/22
/200
1
7/22
/200
1
9/22
/200
1
11/2
2/20
01
1/22
/200
2
3/22
/200
2
5/22
/200
2
7/22
/200
2
9/22
/200
2
11/2
2/20
02
1/22
/200
3
3/22
/200
3
5/22
/200
3
Riv
er K
ilo
met
er
Bonners Ferry, ID
O’Brien Cr.
ID-MT Border
Burbot in the Kootenai River may be near Demographic extinction
Goal:Restore the population to a
fishable level.
A long range goal!
Recommended Flows for Burbot
Spawning Migrations
in the Kootenai River
In Idaho endemic only to the Kootenai River
Once provided important winter commercial and sport fishery in Kootenai River and Kootenay Lake
BurbotEgg 1 mmin diameter
Pelagic(open water)Feed onplankton
As young growin length they move to shorelineand feed on insectsand small fish
Burbot life stages and foodLarger burbot moveTo deeper water andFeed on fish and shrimp
Adults migrate to streamsIn winter and form “spawning balls”
0255075
100125150175
Nu
mb
er
of
Fis
h
01234567
Tem
pera
ture
(o C
)
25 30 1 5 10 15 25
1996
20
weir removed536 fish
050
100150200250300350
Nu
mb
er
of
Fis
h01234567
Tem
pera
ture
(o C
)
1997
1 5 10 15 20 253025
0255075
100125150175
Nu
mb
er
of
Fis
h
01234567
Tem
pera
ture
(o C
)
1998
1 5 15 2025 30
05
101520253035
Nu
mb
er
of
Fis
h
01234567
Tem
pera
ture
(o C
)
January February
1999
1 5 2025 2510
malesfemalessex unknown
Spawning synchrony (Arndt and Hutchinson 2000)
Highly synchronizedin timing of maturityand arrival tospawning habitat
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Water velocity cm/second
Bu
rbot
len
gth
cm
0
10
2
0
25
3
0
35
4
0 Burbot swimming endurance (Jones et al. 1974)
Even largest burbotCannot sustain their swimming for 10 minafter velocity reachesabout 24 cm/s
Act
ivit
y
Jan April July Sept Dec Month
Burbot Activity – time of year Paakkonen (2000)
Spawningseason
Burbot are capable of movinglong distances (120 km) but
they are slow
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
1-Oct
15-O
ct
29-O
ct
12-N
ov
26-N
ov
10-D
ec
24-D
ec7-
Jan
21-J
an
4-Feb
18-F
eb
4-M
ar
18-M
ar
Date
Dis
char
ge
(m3/s
)
1962-19711973-1982Winter flow
Post Libby Dam
Pre Libby Dam
Libby Dam1972
Bonners Ferry
Bu
rbot
Time
1973
Lake
Kooca
nusa
Libby Dam (rkm 352)
KootenaiFalls (rkm 310)
Yaa
k
River
Mo
yie
R
ive
r
Deep
BonnersFerry(rkm 246)
Boundary Cr.
Goa
tR
iver
(rkm 170)
Nelson
Duncan
LakeK
ootenay
Lake
South
Arm
West Arm
North
Arm
(rkm 120)
Cre
ek
0 50
Kilometers
BRITISH COLUMBIA
MONTANAWASHINGTON IDAHO
rkm 228
N
S
EW
Primaryburbot study area
Goat RiverOnly knownConsistentSpawning site
Sensitive Life History Factors
(1)Low swimming endurance
(2)Winter spawners - highly synchronized
(3)In Kootenai River must travel long distances (Kootenay Lake and lower river), up to 120 km.
(4)Larvae need immediate source of food (winter)
Objectives 1993-1994
Determine the population status of burbot in the Kootenai River
(1) Size structure
(2) Distribution
(3) Abundance
(4) Movement (winter telemetry)
Bu
rbot
tra
vel a
nd
riv
er lo
cati
o n
Time
December January February
Flo
w f
rom
Lib
by
Dam
Burbot movement
Flow
Spawning season - telemetry 1994-1995
Objectives 1995-present1) Determine genetic differences
2) Estimate population size
3) Determine blood physiology (stress)
4) Determine flow vs. movement relationships
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
Date
Dis
char
ge a
t L
ibb
y D
am
(cm
s)
Test Test Test
Controlled flow tests
Hypothesis h : Libby Dam flows do not inhibit burbot spawning migration simulate pre-dam
o
Results of three low flow tests during the winter of 1997-1998
(1)Significantly more movement during low flow - movement started in late October but more movement in January (need 90 days for migration)
A Conservation Strategy was prepared but flow recommendations were necessary for the next step-
A Conservation Agreement.
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
Date
Dis
char
ge a
t L
ibb
y D
am
(cm
s)Rate/day and distance
Test
Hypothesis h : flow from Libby Dam does not impair Burbot travel rate or distance.
o
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
Date
Dis
char
ge a
t L
ibb
y D
am
(cm
s)Rate/day and distance
Test
1999-2002 no tests
135
140
145
150
155
160
165
October-98
November-98
December-98
January-99
February-99
March-99
Date
Fis
h lo
catio
n (
rkm
)
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
Lib
by
dis
cha
rge
24
ho
urs
prio
r (c
ub
ic m
/s)
Burbot 30.832Discharge
Test – only 3 days
Search for an alternative method to determine suitable flows for burbot migration !
(1)Search all burbot telemetry records from 1994-2000 (68 burbot with transmitters).
(2) Examined all telemetry records – 1,835 contacts.
(3) Travel rate criteria based on distance from Kootenai River in British Columbia to spawning tributaries in Idaho (~ 45 km) and a total travel time of 90 days.
Criteria- Burbot must travel 5 km or more in10 days or less. “Stepwise movement”
Stepwise movement –1994-2000
Flow range (m /s) Number of cases100-200 20201-300 10301-400 3401-500 5501-600 5601-700 1700+ 0Total 44
3
Spawning migration and spawningExamined all stepwise movements of burbotand flow in two class intervals, Oct-Feb 1994-2000 only
Cases of Cases of(m /s) movement flow days (m /s)100- 15 186300
301- 11 538700Fisher exact test (p = 0.001)
33
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
Date
Dis
char
ge a
t L
ibb
y D
am
(cm
s)
Flow 1994-2000
Burbotspawn
1) Flow of 176 m /s from Libby Dam2) For period of 90 d
3Recommendations
Burbot migration
Examination of temperature and burbot behavior
Locations for burbot 12 (sonic 96) by temperature and date
70
90
110
130
150
170
190
210
230
250
6/28
/199
47/
26/1
994
8/23
/199
49/
20/1
994
10/1
8/19
9411
/15/
1994
12/1
3/19
941/
10/1
995
2/7/
1995
3/7/
1995
4/4/
1995
5/2/
1995
5/30
/199
56/
27/1
995
7/25
/199
58/
22/1
995
9/19
/199
510
/17/
1995
11/1
4/19
9512
/12/
1995
1/9/
1996
2/6/
1996
3/5/
1996
4/2/
1996
4/30
/199
65/
28/1
996
6/25
/199
67/
23/1
996
8/20
/199
69/
17/1
996
Date
Riv
er k
ilom
eter
-5
0
5
10
15
20
25
Tem
pera
ture
( oC
)
B12_96
DegC
Locations for burbot 234 (sonic 2632) by temperature and date
130
135
140
145
150
155
160
2/1/
2001
2/22
/200
13/
15/2
001
4/5/
2001
4/26
/200
15/
17/2
001
6/7/
2001
6/28
/200
17/
19/2
001
8/9/
2001
8/30
/200
19/
20/2
001
10/1
1/2
001
11/1
/200
111
/22/
2001
12/1
3/20
011/
3/20
021/
24/2
002
2/14
/200
23/
7/20
023/
28/2
002
4/18
/200
25/
9/20
025/
30/2
002
6/20
/200
27/
11/2
002
8/1/
2002
8/22
/200
29/
12/2
002
10/3
/200
210
/24/
2002
11/1
4/20
0212
/5/2
002
12/2
6/20
021/
16/2
003
2/6/
2003
2/27
/200
3
Date
Riv
er k
ilom
eter
-2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
Tem
pera
ture
(oC
)
B234_2632
DegC
Fidelity forGoat River
Free rangingtransboundary
New ideas for rehabilitation?
1) Use donor stocks2) Use a captive signal stock to
a. Concentrate spawnersb. Establish spawners in individual
tributaries c. Rehabilitation measure with wild fish – improve recruitment
Goal: Rehabilitate the Kootenay River stock of burbot in Idaho to population abundance that can
sustain a harvest of surplus fish.
Objective: Determine the extent of the spawning stock of burbot in selected tribs.
Objective: Determine if burbot spawner numbers can be concentrated with a signalStock of burbot.
Objective: Use a donor stock of burbot to Enhance recruitment - burbot are stock limited
Experiment with tributaries
A B C
Weir
Captive fish
An International Conservation Strategy has been prepared
What is next?
(1) A Conservation Agreement is needed now. Implementation of Recommended flows
from Libby Dam during winter could range from 100 – 300 m /s but must average about 176 m /s for 90 days (Nov-Jan).
3
33
Top Related