The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAPA354r- EFFECTS OF HYDROELECTRIC DISCHARGE FLUCTUATION ON SALMON AND STEELHEAD IN THE SKAGIT RIVER, WASHINGTON by Q. J. Stober, S. C. Crumley, D. E. Fast, .and E. S. Killebrew and R. M. Woodin Washington State Department of Fisheries and G. Engman, G. Tutmark Washington;, State Department of ~arne FINAL REPORT December 1979 to December 1982 for City of Seattle Department of Lighting Office of Environmental Affairs Seattle, Washington t ':rJ ~ .., m i 0 .. rn m .D ~ tO < -1 co rn ~ ~ P. ~ I.NSliTUrtE····•··· - -! .. ,.. ' ·- - ARLIS . Alaska Resources L1hrarv & I .t::. • .... n 1 ormation Servtces Anchorage, Alaska EFFECTS OF HYDROELECTRIC DISCHARGE FLUCTUATION ON SALMON AND STEELHEAD IN THE SKAGIT RIVER, WASHINGTON by Q. J. Stober, s. C. Crumley, D. E. Fast, and E. S. Killebrew and R. M. Woodin Washington State Department of Fisheries and G. Engman, G. Tutmark Washington State Department of Game FINAL REPORT December 1979 to December 1982 for City of Seattle Department of Lighting Office of Environmental Affairs Seattle, Washington Submitted: December 31, 1982 FRI-UW-8218 December 1982 l4;;l..5 . '5~ A:;t3 ()(). ~51-l Approved: - - - ,_ .,:;,. 0') 0 ~ ' ""' ""'" ""'" ! 0 0 0 1.!) 1.!) ,...... ("') ("') ,__ T.AELE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES • • • • LIST OF APPENDIX FIGURE • LIST OF TABLES ••.•• . . LIST OF APPENDIX TABLES • 1. 0 ABS'tXAC'! • • • • • 2. 0 ACXNOWLEDGMENTS • 3.0 INTRODUCTION • • • 3.1 History of the Skagit Project 3.2 Objectives •• 4.0 STUDY AREA ••••• 5 • 0 METHODS AND MA'l'ERIAI.S • 5.1 Escapements, Spawner Distribution and Area Spawned •• 5.1.1 Salmon.... • •••• 5.1.2 Steelhead ••••••••••••• 5.2 Adult Spawning-Flew Fluctuation Studi.es S .. 2.1 Salmon Spawning Behavior •••• 5.2.2 Steelhead Redd Dep~h -Flew Relationship 5.3 Instream Incubation Tests ••••••••••• 5.3.1 Steelhead Temperature Unit Requirements. 5.4 5.5 5.3.2 Flow Fluctuation Tests ••••• Laboratory Incubation Tests • • • • • • • 5.4.1 Experimental Facilities •• 5.4.2 Artificial Redds ••• 5.4.3 Physical Parameters •• 5.4.4 Experimental Design ••• 5. 4. 5 Alevin and Fry Quality • • Intragravel Alevin Surri.val, Movement and Behavior. 5.5.1 Intragravel Behavior Studies in 1981 5.5.2 Intragravel Behavior Studies in 1982 5.5.3 Aquaria Behavior Studies ••••• 5.5.4 Velocity Studies •••• 5.5.5 Dissolved Oxygen Studies • 5.5.6 Photobehavior Studies •. iii vi X xvii xxi xxii xxiv 1 1 2 3 9 9 9 9 10 10 12 12 12 13 14 14 14 17 18 19 21 21 23 24 24 27 27 6.0 5 • 6 Fry Stranding . • • • . • . • • • • • • • • 5.6.1 Salmon ••••••.••••••••• 5.6.1.1 Survey Sites and Techniques • 5.6.1.2 Monitoring of Fry Abundance 5.6.1.3 Stream Flow ••••••• 5.6 .1.4. .-imle:-~S,era:::&i-3:ng .. • 5.6.1.5. -T1me,-r-ai::tor--,,.<..,~.\ ••••••• 5.6 .2 Steelhead. -------- RESULTS •• . .. 6 .l Escapements, Spawner Distribution and Area S.pawned. 6.1.1 Sa.lm.on .•.....• a ••••• 6.1.2 Steelhead Trout •••••• 6.2 Adult Spawning -Flow Fluctuation Studies 6.2.1 Salmon Spawning Behavior ••••• 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6 6.2.1.1 Chinook ••••••••• 6.2.1.2 Ch\llll. .•.•....... IIi • 6.2.2 Steelhead Redd Depth-Flow Relationships. Instream Incubaeion Tests • • • • • • • • • • • 6.3.1 Steelhead Temperature Unit Requirement • 6.3.2 Instream Flow Fluctuation Tests •• Laboratory Incubation Tests • • • • • 6 • 4 .1 Euvi.r01DIIental Parameters • • • • 6.4.2 Dewatering Test ••••••••• 6.4.2.1. Fertilization to Eyed Stage (1980-81) 6.4.2.2 Eyed through Hatching •••• 6.4.2.3 Fertilization through Hatching •• 6.4.3 Static Water Test ••••••••••••• 6.4.3.1 Fertilization through Eyed Stage. 6.4.3.2 Eyed through Hatching •••• 6.4.3.3 Hatching through Emergence •••••• 6 • 4 • 4 Alevin Quality • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Intragravel Alevin Survival, Movement and Behavior. 6.5.1 6.5.2 6.5.3 6.5.4 6.5.5 6.5.6 Intragravel Behavior Studies Intragravel Behavior Studies Aquaria Behavior Studies • Velocity Studies • • • • Dissolved Oxygen Studies Photobehavioral Studies. in 1981 in 1982 Fry Stranding ." • • • • • • • • • • • • 6 . 6 .. 1 Sa.lm.ou . . . . . . . . . . "' • . . 6.6 .1.1 Ab.undance of Salmon Fry 6.6.1.2 Stream Flow •••• 6.6.1.3 Stranding Index vs. Time Factor • 6. 6. 2 Steelhead • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • iv 30 30 30 31 31 32. 32 33 35 .35 35 43 51 51 51 59 62 66 66 66 70 70 75 75 78 79 87 87 87 89 91 91 91 107 107 110 116 116 122. 122 122 122 122 140 ,_ - - ~ ' - - - 7.0 DISCUSSION •••• • • oli • • • • • • • • • • • • • 7.1 Escapements, Spawner Distribution and Area Spawned 7.2 Adult Spawning Behavior-Flow Fluctuation Relationship. 7.3 Instream Incubation Tests •• 7.4 Laboratory Incubation Tests. 7.5 Intragravel Alevin Survival, Movement and Behavior •• 7.5.1 Dewaeering Behavior Studies (1981 and 82) 7.5.2 Velociry Studies. • • • • • ••• 7.5.3 Dissolved Oxygen Studies •• 7.5.4 Photobehavioral Studies 7.6 Fry Stranding •••• 8.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS • 8.1 Escapements, Spawner Distribution and Area Spawned 8.2 Adult Spawning Behavior •• 8.3 Instream Incubation Tests. . . . . . 8.4 Laboratory Incubation Tests •• 8.5 Alevin Behavior Studies. . . . . . . 8.6 Fry Stranding •• 9. 0 RECOMMENDAXIONS • • . . . 10.0 LITERAXURE CITED •• ll.O APPENDICES •••• . . v Page 142 142 142 143 144 148 148 151 152 153 154 159 159 160 160 161 161 162 164 169 175 Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 LIST OF FIGURES Skagit Basin study area • • • • • • Daily range of flow fluctuations in ft and cfs for Skagit River at Newhalem (USGS) for 1980 •••••• Daily range of flow fluctuations in ft and cfs for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS) for 1980 • • • • Daily range of flow fluctuations in ft and cfs for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS) for 1981 • • • • Daily range of flow fluctuations in ft and cfs for Skagit River at Newhalem (USGS) for 1981. • • • • • Diagram of experimental water table with section of false bottom and sides removed to show water flow to several separately controlled camparements Artificial redd with section cut away to show egg placement in gravel • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Alevin behavior chamber • Alevin behavior aquarium. w1 th alevin traps underneath to determine rheotactic movement. • • • • • • • • Alevin flow box for studies on effect of velocity on movement and behavior.. • • • • • • Y-maze used in studies of alevin movement and behavior related to dissolved oxygen levels • Light-dark choice box used in studies of photo- behavior. • • • • • • • Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS), September 1980. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount {USGS), October 1980. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS), November 1980 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS), December 1980 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi 4 5 6 7 8 15 16 22 26 28 29 . 56 . 57 . 60 0 61 Number 17 18 19 20 -21 -22 - 2.3 24 25 - 26 - 27 -28 - Mean daily temperature of Clark Creek water utilized ·in the experimental hatchery and the Skagit River at Alma Creek for 1980-81 • • • • • • • • • • Mean daily temperature of Clark Creek water used in the experimental hatchery and Skagit River at Alma Creek for 1981.-82 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Relative humidity measured inside and outside of the experimental hatchery building for 1980~81 •••••• Relative humidity measured inside and outside of the experimental hatchery building for 1981-82 •••••• Percent survival of chinook salmon embryos dewatered for 2, 4, 8, 16 and 24 hrs/day in artificial redds from fertilization through hatching • • • • • • • Percent survival of pink salman embryos dewatered for 2, 4, 8, 16, and 24 hrs/day in artificial redds from fertilization through hatching. • • . • • • • • • • Percent survival of chum salmon embryos dewatered for 2, 4, 8, 16 and 24 hrs I day in artificial redds from fertilization through hatching. • • • • • • • • • • • Percent· survival of steelbead trout embryos dewatered for 2, 4~ 8, 16 and 24 hrs/da.y in artificial redds fram fertilization trhough hatching • • • .. • • • • • Percent survival of chinook salmon alevins dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in large gravel through the hatching period • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Percent survival of chinook salmon alevins dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in mixed gravel th~ough the hatching period • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Percent survival of chinook salmon alevins dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in large gravel through the hatching period • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Percent survival of coho salmon alevins dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in medium graveL through the hatching period • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • vii 71 72 73 74 83 84 "'35 86 101 101 102 102 Number 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 Percent survival of coho salmon alevins dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in small gravel through the hatching period • • • • • • • • • • • • • Percent survival of coho salmon alevins dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in mixed gravel through the hatching period • • • • • Percent survival of steelhead trout alevins dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in large gravel through the hatching period • • • • • Percent survival. of steelhead trout alevins dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in medium gravel through the hatching period. • • • • Percent survival of steelhead trout alevins dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrsiday in small gravel through the hatching period ••••• Percent survival of steelhead trout alevins dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in mixed gravel through the hatching period •••••.• Temperature of Lake Washington water used in alevin behavior tests • • • • • • • • • • Number of chinook salmon alevins trapped per section after moving toward inlet (1) or outlet (4) • . . . • . • . . • . . . Number of pink salmon alevins trapped per section after moving toward inlet (1) or outlet (4) . . • Coho alevin behavior in zero, medium, and high velocity tests at early, middle, and late deve~opmental stages. • • ••• Chum alevin behavior in zero, medium, and hi.gh velocity tests at early, middle, and late developmental stages. • • • • • • • • • • Steelhead alevin behavior in zero, medium, and high velocity test3 at early, middle, and late developmental stages •••••••••••••••• Coho alevin photobehavior from hatching to emergence •• Chum alevin photobehavior from hatching to emergence •• Steelhead alvein photobehavior from hatching to 103 103 105 105 106 106 109 112 112 113 114 115 119 120 emergence .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . e e 121 viii Number 44 45 46 47 - 48 49 -50 51 52 53 54 55 56 Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Newhalem (USGS) , March 1980 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Newhalem (USGS) , April 19 80 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Newhalem (USGS) t March 1981 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Newhalem (USGS) ~~ • o • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Bour~y height daua for Skagit River at Newhal~ (USGS) • Hourly gage he~ght'data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS), March 1980 ••••••• Hourly gage height data for Skagit Ri-ver at Marblemount (USGS) , Aprll 1980 • • • • • • • Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS) , Marcil 1981 • • • • • Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS) • • • • • • • • • • • • • Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS) • • • • • • • • • • • • • Stranding index vs ·dowaramping factor for study site no. l,. 1980, 81 and 82 data combined. Sttanding index vs downramping factor for study site no. 2, 1980, 81, and 82 data c:olllb-ined • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Stranding index vs dawnramp.ing factor for study site no. 3, 1980, 81, and 82 data combined . . . • .. . . • • . . . • • • . • 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 136 137 138 LIST OF APPENDIX FIGURES N.umber Page Appendix I 1 Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Newhalem (USGS), January-December, 1980 . . . . . . . 176 2 Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS), January-December 1980 . . . . . . 187 3 Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Newhalem (USGS), January-December 1981. . . . . . . . 198 4 Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS), January-December 1981 • . . . . . 209 5 Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Newbalem (USGS), January-December 1982. . . . . . . . 221 6 Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS) , January-December 1982 . . . . . . 230 Appendix V 1 Percent survival of chinook salmon embryos dewaterad for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in large gravel from fertilization to the eyed stage . . . . . 263 2 Percent survival of chinook salmon embryos dewatered fen' 4, 8 and 16 hrs/ day in medium gravel from fertilization to the eyed stage . . . . . 263 3 Percent survival of chinook salmon embryos dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in small gravel from fertilization to the eyed stage . . . . . 264 4 Percent survival of chinook salmon embryos dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in mixed gravel from fer'tilization to the eyed stage . . . . . 264 5 Percent survival of coho salmon embryos dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in large gravel from fertilization to the eyed stage . . . . . 265 6 Percent survival of coho salmon embryos dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in medium gravel from fertilization to the eyed stage . . . . . 265 X Number Appendix V 7 8 9 -10 -ll -12 13 14 l5 16 17 18 19 Percent surrtval of coho salmon embryos dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in small gravel from fertilization to the eyed stage. Percent surrtval of steelhead trout embryos dewatered for 4y 8 and 16 hrs/day in large gravel from fertilization to the eyed stage. Percent survival of steelhead trout embryos dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in medium gravel from fertilization to the eyed stage. Bercent survi.val of steelhead trout embryos dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in small gravel from fertilization to the eyed stage. Percent survival of steelhead. trout embryos dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in mixed gravel from fertilization to the eyed stage. Percent survival of coho salmon embryos dawatered for 24 hrs/day in large, medimum, small and mixed gravels from fertilization through eyed stage. • • • • • • • • • • • • Percent survival of chinook salmon embryos dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 nrs/day in large gravel from. eyed thi:ough hatching~ • • • • Percent survival of chincok salmon em&ryos dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in medium gravel from eyed through hatching. • • • • • Percent survival of chinook salmon embryos dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in small gravel from eyed through hatching. • • • • Percent surv±val of chinook salmon embryos dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in mixed gravel from eyed. thi:ough hatching. • • • • Percent survival of chinook salmon embryos dewatered for 24 hrs/day in large gravel. from eyed through hatching. • • • • • • • • • · • Percent survival of chinook sallllon embryos dewatered for 24 hrs/day in medium gravel from eyed tnrough hatching • • • • • • • • Percent survival of chinook salmon embryos dewatered for 24 hrs/day in small gravel from eyed thnough hatching. • • • • • • • • • ••• xi 266 267 267 268 268 269 270 270 271 271 272 272 273 Number Appendix V 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Percenc survival of chinook salmon embryos dewacered for 24 hrs/day in mixed gravel from eyed chuough hacching ••••••• Percenc survival of coho salmon embryos dewacered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in large gravel from eyed chttough hacching • • • Percenc survival of coho salmon embryos dewacered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in medium gravel from eyed through hacching • • • Percenc survival of coho salmon embryos dewacered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in small gravel from eyed through hacching· • • • Percenc survival of coho salmon embryos dewacered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in mixed gravel from eyed through hacching • • • Percenc survival of coho salmon embryos dewacered for 24 hrs/ day in large, medium, small and mixed gravels from eyed th~ough hatching •••••••••••• Percenc survi.val. of chum salmon embryos dewatered fo~ 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in large gravel from eyed through hacching • • • Percenc survival· of chum salmon embryos dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in medium gravel from eyed through hatching • • • Percenc survival of ch1JD1 salmon embryos dewacered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in small gravel from eyed chttough hatching • • • Percent survival of ch1JD1 salmon embryos dewatered for 4, 8 and. 16 hrs/day in mixed gravel from eyed thnough hacching • • • • • Percenc survival of cnum salmon ~ryos dewatered for 24 hrs/day in large, medium, small and mixed gravels from eyed through ha-tching. a • • • • • " .. .. 0 • " • e Percenc suTVival of sceelhead trouc embryos dewacered 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in large gravel from eyed through hacching •••••••••• xii 273 274 274 275 275 276 277 278 278 278 279 280 Number Appendix V 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 Percent survival of steelhead trout embryos dewatered for 4, a and 16 hrs/day in medium gravel from eyed thDough hatching • • • • • Percent survival of steelhead trout embryos dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in small gravel from eyed through hatching • · • • • • Percen~ survival of steelhead trout embryos dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in mixed gravel from eyed through hatching • • • • • Percent survival of steelhead trout embryos dewatered for 24 hrs/day in large gravel from eyed through hatching. • • • • • • • • Percen~ survival of steelhead trout embryos dewatered for 24 hrs/day in medium gravel from eyed through hatching. • • • • • Percent survival of steelhead trout embryos dewatered· for 24 hrs/day in small gravel from eyed through ha.tching .••••• Percent survival of steelhead trout embryos dewa~ered for 24 hrs/day in mdxed gravel from eyed through hatching. • • • • • • • • Percent survival of. chinook salmon embryos dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in mixed gravel from fertilization through hatching. Percent survival of chincok salmcn em&ryos devatered for 24 hrs/day in large, lDed±um, small and mixed gravel. hom fertiliz-ation th:ough hatching. • • • • • • • • • • • Percent survival of coho salmon embryos dewatered 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in mixed gravel from fertilization through hatching. Percent survival of steelhead trout embryos dewatered for 24 hrs/day in large, lDedium, small and mixed ~avels from fertilization th~ough hatching. • • • • • • • • • • • Percent survival of coho salmon embryos in static water for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in large gravel from fertilization to the eyed stage • xiii. 280 281 281 282 282 283 283 284 284 285 286 287 Number Appendix V 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 Percent survival of coho salmon embryos in static water for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in medium gravel from fertilization to the eyed stage • • • Percent survival of coho salmon embryos in static water for 4, 8 and 16_ hrs/day in small gravel from fertilization to the eyed stage. • Percent survival of coho salmon embryos in static water for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in mixed gravel from fertilization to the eyed stage • Percent survival of steelhead trout embryos in static water for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in la~ge gravel from fertilization to the eyed stage Percent survival of steelhead trout embryos in static water for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in medium gravel from fertilization to the eyed stage Percent survival of steelhead trout embryos in static water for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in small gravel from fertilization to the eyed stage Percent survival of steelhead trout embryos in static water for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in m±xed gravel from fertilization to the-eyed stage •• Percent survival of Chinook salmon embryos in static water for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in large gravel from eyed th~ougb hatching . "" . . . . . Percent surviYal of chinook salmon embryos in static water for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in medi~ gravel from eyed through ha tc:hing . . . 0 . . . Percent sm:rtval of chinook salmon embryos in static water for 4, 8 and 16 hrs I day in small gravel from eyed throu~ hatching . . . . . . . Percent survival of chinook salmon embryos in static water for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in mixed gTavel from eyed through hatching •.• . . . . . . Percent survival of chinook salmon embryos in static water for 24 hrs/day in large, medium and small gravels from eyed through hatching. . . . xiv . . . . . 287 288 288 289 289 290 290 . . 29i . . 291 . . 292 . . 292 293 - Number -Appendix: V 56 57 58 -59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 Percent survival of coho salmon embryos in static water for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in large gravel from eyed through hatching • • • Percent survival of coho salmon emb'ryos in static water for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in medium gravel from eyed thuough hatching • • • Percent survival of coho salmon embryos in static water for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in small gravel from eyed through hatching • • • Percent survival of coho salmon embryos in static water for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in mixed gravel from eyed through hatching • • • • • • • Percent survival of coho salmon embryos in static water for 24 hrs/day in large, 1De.dium and small gravels from eyed through hatching Percent survival of chum salmon embryos in static water for 8 and 16 hrs/day in large gravel from eyed through hatching ••••••••••••• Percent survival of chum salmon embryos in stat:l.c water for 8 and 16 hrs/day in medium gravel. from eyed through hatching • • • • ~ • • Percent survi'Val of chum salmon embryos in stat:l.c: water for 8 and 16 hrs/day in small gravel from eyed through hatcliing • • • Percent survival of chum salmon embryos in static water for 8 and 16 hrs/day in mixed gravel from eyed through hatching ••••• Percent survi'Val of steelhead trout embryos in static: water for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in large gravel fra.m eyed through hatching • • Percent survival of steelhead trout embryos in static water for 4, 8 and 16 brs/day in med:l.um gravel from eyed through hatching • Percent survival of steelhead trout embryos in static water for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in small gravel from eyed through hatching • . Percent survival of steelhead trout embryos in static water for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in mixed gravel from eyed through hatching. 294 294 295 295 296 297 297 298 298 299 299 300 300 Number Appendix V 69 70 71 72 Percent survival of steelhead trout embryos in static water for 24 hrs/day in large gravel from eyed to hatching • • • • • • • • Percent survival of steelhead trout embryos in static water for 24 hrs/day in medium gravel from eyed to hatching • • • • • • • • Percen: survival of steelhead trout embryos in static water for 24 hrs/day in small gravel from eyed to haeching • • • • • • • • Percent survival of steelhead trout embryos in static water for 24 hrs/day in mixed gravel from eyed to hatching • • • • • • • • • • • • • xvi 301 301 302 302 -'7' - - Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ll 12 Estimated Skagit River system spawning escapements Salmon escapement to the Skagit Hatchery racks 1978-1981. • • • ••• Chinook salmon redd counts made by the Washington Department of Fisheries from helicopter and fixed-wing surveys of the Skagit River from Newhalem to the Sauk River. (Surveys made on September 26, 1977 and September 14 and 20 and October 4 and ]Q t 19 78] • • • e • • D • e • • • a • • • • Chinook salmon redd counts made by the Washington Department of Fisheries from helicopter and fixed-wing surveys of the Skagit River from Newhalem to the Sault River. [Surveys made on September l5 and October 5, 1979 and September 9 and 26 and October 23, 1980] ••••••••••••• Chinook salmon redd counts made by the Washington Department of Fisheries from helicopter and fixed-wing surveys of the Skagit River from Newhalem to the Sauk River. (Surveys made on September 8 and October 14, 1981]. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Chinook salmon redd counts from aerial photographs of the Skagit River from Newhalem to the Sauk. River in 1980.. [Photographs taken on October 6 t 1980] . . . . . . . . • •.. . . . . . . . . Area spawned by chinook salmon as determined from aerial photographs of the Skagit River from Newhalem to the Sauk River. [Photographs taken on October 6, 1980] •••••••••• Fish prodlilction of the Skagit Hatchery and fish plants by WDF in the Skagit system from Boyd Creek (river mi.le 44. 7) to Newhalem, 1978-1982 ••••••••. Estimated Skagit River system steelhead spawning escapements (WDG). • • • • • • • • • • • • • Summary of steelhead trout ~edd counts from aerial surveys of mainstem Skagit and Sauk. Rivers, 19 79 (WDG) • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • s Ullllllary of steelhead trout redd counts from aerial surveys of mainstem Skagit and Sauk. Rivers, 1980 (WDG) Summary of steelhead trout redd counts from aerial surveys of mainstem Skagit and Sauk Rivers, 1981 (WDG) xvii 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 44 45 46 47 48 Number 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Summary of steelhead trout .redd counts from aerial surveys of mainstem Skagit and Sauk Rivers, 1982 • Percent distribution steelhead spawning above Sauk R:iver 1974·-to 1982 •••••••••• Sport harvest of Skagit system winter-run (November-April) steelhead trout, 1977-1978 through .~1981-1982 from creel census data • Sport harvest of Skagit system summer run (May-october). :steelhead trout, 1977-1981 • Skag:i.t system Treaty Indian harvest of winter- run steelhead, 1977-1978 through 1981-1982 • • • • • • Mean da:i.ly discharge and minimum release at Gorge Powerhouse • • • • • • • • • • • • Live-to---dead ratios of cnum salmon eggs and alevins incubated in freezer containers in the Skagit River at the Thornton Creek study site. Live-to-dead ratios of chum salmon eggs and alevins incubated in freezeT containers in the Skagit R:iver at Marblemount Slough study site. Live-to-dead ratios of chum salmon eggs and alevins incu!Jated in W:i.tlock-Vibert boxes in the Skagit lliver at the 'thornton Creek study site •••• Geometric mean diameter and substrate paTticle size by groups representing peTcent volume for art:i.f:i.c:i.al substrates used in 1980~81. Chinook and pink salmon spawning· substrate analyses for 1981-82 ..•..... ~~ ............ . Incubation days to 50 percent mortality for chinook salmon tested under four dewatering regimes and gravel sizes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Incubation days to 50 percent mortality for coho salmon test'ed under four dewatering regimes and gravel sizes • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Incubation days to 50 percent mortality for steelhead trout tested under fouT dewatering regimes and gravel sizes • • • • • • • • • • . • • • xviii 39 52 53 54 55 64 67 68 69 76 77 80 81 82 Number 27 28 29 30 - :31 :32 33 - 34 35 36 37 Temperaeure unies to 50% hatching and 75, 50, and 25% survival for chinook, chum, and pink salmon and seeelhead troue embryos dewaeered 0, 2, 4, 8, 16 and 24 hrs/day in 1981-82 • • • • • • • Percene mortality resuleing from single evene dewaeerings of chinook, pink, chum, and coho salmon and steelhead troue alevins for indicaeed ti~es in 1981-82 . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mean and range of lenehs for chinook salmon alevins deuaeered 0, 4, 8, 16, and 24 brs/day as eggs in four gravel sizes in 1980-81. • • • • • • • • • • • • Mean and range of weighes for chinook salmon alevins dewaeered 0, 4, 8, 16 and 24 hrs/day as eggs in four gravel sizes in 1980-81. • • • • • • • • • o • • Mean and range of condi eion factors for chinook salmon alevins dewaeered 0·, 4, a, 16 and 24 hrs, and gravel sizes in 1980-81. • • • • • • o • • • • • • • • • • • Mean and range of 1engehs for coho salmon alevins dewaeered 0, 4, 8, 16 and 24 hrs/day as eggs in four gravel sizes in 1980-81. • • • • • • • • • • Mean and range of weights for coho salm.ou alevins dewatered 0, 4, 8, 16 and 24 hrs/day· as eggs in four gravel sizes in l980-8lo • o o • • • • • • Mean and range of condieion factors for coho salmon alevins dewatered 0, 4, 6 , 8 !t • 16 and 24 hrs I day as eggs in four gravel sizes in 1980-81 • • , • • , , , • • • • • Mean body and yolk-sac weights, body weights to initial yolk weighe ratio, yolk-sac eo initial yolk weighe ratio and energy of meeabol.tsm fo1: chinook salmon dewaeered for 0, 2, 4, 8, 16 and 24 hrs/day from fertilization to hatching. , • Mean body and yolk-sac weighes., body weigh·t to in:itial yolk weight ratio, yolk-sac to initial yolk weight ratio, and energy of metabolism for pink salmon dewatered for 0, 2, 4, 8, 16 and 24 hrs/day from fertilization to hatching •••• , •• Mean body and yolk-sac weights, body weighe eo initial yolk weight ratio, yolk-sac to initial yolk weighe ratio, and energy of metabolism for chum salmon dewatered for 0, 2, 4, 8, 16 and 24 hrs/day from fertilization to hatching. • . . •..•..• xix 88 90 92 9:3 94 95 96 97 98 98 99 Number 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 Mean body and yolk-sac weights, body weight to initial yolk weight ratio, yolk-sac to initial yolk weight ratio and energy of metabolism for steelhead trout dewatered for 0, 2, 4, 8, 16, and 24 hrs/day from fertilization to hatching. • • • • Percent mortality of steelhead alevins at various dewatering rates • • • • • • • Percent mortality-of chinook salmon alevins dewatered at 3 inches/hour • • • • • • • Percent mortality of pink salmon alevins dewatered at 3 inches/hour • • • • • • • Percentage of coho salmon alevins remaining in staging area and migrating to high and low dissolved oxygen levels in arms of Y-maze. • • Percentage of chum salmon alevins remaining in staging area and migrating to high and low dissolved oxygen levels in arms of Y-maze. • Percentage of steelhead alevins remaining in staging area and migrating to high and low dissolved oxygen levels in arms of Y-maze. • Chinook salmon fry abundance and stranding data for 1980, 1981, and 1982 •••••••••••••• Stream flow data during the downramping studies~ 1980, 1981, and 1982. • • • • • Results of 1982 Skagit River steelhead fry strandin~ studies. • • • •••• 99 108 111 111 117 117 118 123 134 141 -· - Number Appendix II lA 2 2 Appendix III l 2 3 4 5 6 7 a Appendix IV 1 2 3 LIST OF APPENlliiX TABLES Site specific downramping data for 19 March 1982 Site specific dcwnramptna data for 30 March 1982 Regression of stranding index at grouped ramping rates, high (A) and moderate (B) vs. ~ factor Regressions of downramping vs stranding index without (A) and with (B) the time factor • • • Skagit summer-fall chinook tagging data, l980o • o • Observation data for Skagit summer-fall chinook, 19 80 • • o o • o • • • • Observation dates and conditions for Skagit summer-fall chinook, 1980 • Skagit summer-fall chinook tagging data, 1980. Skagit chum salmon tagging data, 1980. o Observation data for Skagit chum salmon, 1980. Observation dates and conditions for Skagit chum· salmon, 1980 • o o o Skagit chum tagging data, 1980 • Steelhead redd.depths Marblemount area 1982. Steelhead redd depths Illabot-corkindale area 1982. • . . .. . . . . . . . . . Steelhead redd depths Upper Rockport area 1982 • 238 239 240 243 246 251 253 254 255 257 259 260 261 262 ·- - 1.0 ABS1'RAC'l' The escapement levels of (summer-fall) chinook, pink and coho salmon for 1978-1981 were comparabte to previous years. A strong year class of chum salmon occurred in 1978 with a less than average return in 1980. The most heavily spawned section of the mainstem Skagit River for summer-fall chinook was between Diobsud Creek and the Cascade River. The number and distribution ot spawning steelhead trout was most concentrated in the mainstem Skagit between the Cascade and Sauk Rivers. The behavioral study of spawning chinook, chum and pink salmon exposed to fluctuating flows showed a general pattern of activity indicating females would complete redds if fluctuating di3charge provided adequate flows over a redd site at least several hours daily. The incubation of steelhead trout eggs at several Skagit River sites indicated that 1050 temperature units are required to reach the button-up stage of development. The effects of dewatered or static water conditions on the survival of incubating chinook, coho, and chum salmon and steelhead trout eggs and alevins in selected gravel environments were examined. A 9 x q factorial design was employed in the first year stUdies with 5 dewatered or static conditions (0, q, 8, 16 and 2q hrs (continuous) per day) and q gravel si.zes (0.33-1.35, 0.67- 2.67, 1.35-5.08, and 0.08-5.08 em) as the environmental variables. In the second year a single gravel composition representative of Skagit River substrate was used with dewatering times of 0, 2, q, 8, 16 and 2q hrs/day. Eggs were tested from the time of fertilization through hatching. Prehatching survival generally was high for all species, gravel sizes and dewatering or static regimes tested. Posthatching survival for all species xxii and· gravel sizes generally decreased in direct relation to the amount of time dewatered or in static condition. For all species. gravel size and dewatering regimes at least SO percent of the alevins had died within a week after hatching. The alevin behavior studies have shown that salmonid alevins are capable of making downward migrations through some gravel substrates to avoid dewatering. The size of the gravel substrate is directly related to the number of successful migrations~ The relationship between ramping rates from 357 to 2757 cfs/hr and salmon fry stranding was investigated. The inclusion of daylight as a variable suggested an interaction with downramping and salmon fry stranding; however, steelhead fry indicated an opposite effect with more stranded at night. Additional behavioral studies are needed to define the responses of juvenile salmonids to flaw fluctuation. ~ill -2.0 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Thi~ study was sponsored by the City of Seattle Department of Lighting, Environmental Affairs Division, Seattle, Washington. Field and laboratory studies were conducted as a cooperative effort between the following agencies and associated personnel: -Fisheries Research Institute, University of Wa~hington Dr. Q. J. Stober, Principal Investigator Mr. S. c. Crumley, Project Leader Hr. D. E. Fast, Pre-Doctoral Research Associate Mr. E. S. Killebrew, Field Project Biologi~t Washington State Department of Fi~heries, Olympia Mr. Bob Gerke Mr. R. M. Woodin - Washington State Department of Game, Seattle -Mr. Gary Engman Mr • Greg Tutmark Skagit System Cooperative Mr. Steve Fransen U.S. National Marine Fisheries Service, Seattle Mr. Jon Linvog U.S. Fi~h and Wildlife Service, Olympia Hr. Tom Payne In addition to the above organizations, the U.S. Forest Service and North Cascades National Park Service are represented on the Skagit Interim Agreement ::a:lv Standing Committee. The valuable cooperation and assistance received from Mr. John Clayton and Mr. Steve Stout at the Washington Department of Fisheries Skagit Salmon Hatchery is greatly appreciated. Mr. R. Orrell from WDF's Skagit laboratory provided information on Skagit River salmon and additional assistance in the field. Messrs. Engman and Tutmark (WDG) conducted aerial and field surveys and provided additional information on Skagit River game fish. Mr. Sterling Cross (WDG) assisted in the supply of steelhead eggs. The U.S. Geological Survey provided timely discharge and temperature data for the Skagit River. Thanks are due to Dr. E. Brannon, University of Washington, School of Fisheries, for technical advice on salmon egg development, handling, and salmon alevin behavior; Mr. G. Yokoyama, University of Washington Hatchery for supplying eggs and technical assistance. Additional part-time FRI personnel who assisted in construction of the laboratory facility were Lynn McComas, Gloria McDowel and Aska Hamalainen. Mike Goebel and Paul Dinnel provided temporary assistance in the field studies. - - - 1 3.0 INTRODUCTION 3.1 History of the Skagit Project The City of Seattle began development of the hydroelectric potential of the Skagit River in the early 1900's. The Lighting Department of the City undertook a staged development of three dams: Gorge, Diablo and Ross, which were begun in 1919, 1927, and 1937, respectively. Plans for development included the multistage construction of Ross Dam which was completed to an elevation of 1,365 ft in 1940, to 1,550 ft in 1946, and to the present elevation of 1,615 ft in 1949. The presence and operation of these dams has altered the general flow and thermal regimes of the Skagit River downstream of the Skagit Project. Operational constraints in addition to those specified by Federal license were implemented in 1972 by informal agreement between the Washington Department of Fisheries (WDF) and Seattle City Light (SCL). Minimum flows were established during the period of peak juvenile salmon abundance in an effort to reduce the impact of dam operation on downstream fi.sh survival. In 1979, relicensing of these existing projects stimulated negotiations to obtain greater re30lution of the relationships between regulated discharge and salmon and steelhead production,. The City of Seattle, Washington Departments of Fisheries and Game, Skagit System Indian Tribes, u.s. Fish and Wildlife Service, and U.S. National Marine Fisheries Service entered into a two-year interim agreement (FEBC Docket Mo. EL-78-36) regulating the rate and magnitude of now nuctuation in the Skagit River. The present fisheries studies were required by this agreement to obtain additional data on salmon and steelhead reproduction. 2 3.2 Objectives Field study objectives were designed to determine the effects of Skagit River flow fluctuations on the SRawning behavior, egg deposition efficiency, incubation, fry survival ta emergence and fry stranding of steelhead trout and chinook and chum salmon. Laboratory studies encompassed two areas: (1) the effects of fluctuating flows on survival of eggs and alevins and 2) the behavior of pre-emergent alevins. Specific objectives in the first area were to 1) determine the tolerance ta continuous dewatering on pre-and post- hatching egg-alevin development stages of chinook, coho, chum and pink salmon and steelhead trout; 2) determine the tolerance to multiple dewatering regimes of 2, 4, 8, and 16 hours per day on pre-and post-hatching stages of each species; 3) determine the tolerance to multiple dewatering regimes (2, 4, 8, and 16 hours daily) throughout all developmental stages; 4) determine survival rates for each of the above dewatering o~ static water regimes in specific gravel substrates and 5) determine the quality of fry surviving each dewatering regime. Specific objectives in the second a~ea were to determine 1) the ability of alevins to make downward intragravel migrations to avoid dewatering; 2) if intragravel movement of alevins occurs under conditions of adequate velocity, dissolved oxygen, and darkness; 3) the level of water velocity that will stimulate movement of alevins and record if that movement is random or indicative of a positive or negative rheotactic response; 4) the survival and movement of alevins in response to various levels of dissolved oxygen; 5) the direction and magnitude of alevin photo response; and 6) if the developmental stage of an alevin alters its response to the preceding environmental stimuli. ·.) !~ . ...c· . , ... 3 ZJ.O STUDY AREA The Skagit River, with headwaters in Canada, flows south across the international boundary through a reservoir complex made up of Ross, Diablo and GQrge reservoirs, then continues generally west where it enters Puget Seund near Mount Vernon, Washington. The Skagit is the largest river flowing into the Seund. There are three major tributaries to the Skagit River: the Cascade River, which now in at the town of Marblemount at river mile ·cRM> 78.1; the Sauk River, which enters near Rockport at RM 67.0; and the Baker River, which nows in at Concrete at RM 56.5. Numerous additional small tributaries enter the Skagit River. These studies were conducted primarily in the Skagit River between Newhalem and the confluence of the Sauk River. This area of the Skagit River immediately downstream of Newhalem is most affected by operation of SCL dams. A map showing the Skagit River study area is presented in Fig. 1. The locations of U.S. Geological Survey gaging stations, salmon hatchery and laboratory and rearing facilities operated by WDF and WDG are also indicated. The 1980-81 daily maximUIII, minilllUIIl and mean gage heights at Newhalem and Marblemount are presented in Figs. 2, 3, 4, and 5. The gage heights have been converted into discharge in cubic feet per second which indicate a consistent change in daily discharge throughout the year. A complete set of these data plotted by hour and day can be found in Appendix I. IIQifHD «< UiGI GAQIHQ IWIOH 0 IIUDW AliA ;-+ .......... lllv ..... .. IIWIIIIHIWOIU1' .. IIAII IUIINCII'ONDI WAIHINOlON "' ~ Fig. 1. Skagit Basin study area. l . ] - GAGE HEIGHT DAILY RANGE 1980-SKAGIT RIVER AT NEWHALEM j ' -i! -----.- Fig. 2. Daily range of flow fluctuations in ft and cfs for Skagit River at Newhalem (USGS) for 1980. The mean daily and monthly discharges are also shown. 1- 12 11 10 9 ttl B 11... 3 7 3 2 ·. GAGE HEIGHT DRILY RANGE 1980 -SKAGIT RIVER AT MARBLEMOUNT . -:. r :. :-,. ·. _; ··-... ·.:··::. . 11-.tiWHHillll::-tH • • ••• , . . . ...........,....,.,.;-Ill . . . . TIME IN DAYS 65 45 30 20 10 5 2.5 1.2 Fig. J. Daily range of flow fluctuations in ft and cfs for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS) for 1980. The mean daily and monthly discharges are also shown. CJ ..... til n :X: ):a :;o en Pl >< C) 0 C) 0 "11 til J .·~· I GAG£ HEIGHT DAILY RANGE 1981 -SKAGIT RIVER AT MARBLEMOUNT 5 2 TIME IN OAY6 20 15 10 5 4 .3 2 Fig. 4. Daily range in flow fluctuations in ft and cfa for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS) for 1981. The mean daily discharges and the mean monthly discharges are also shown. ) 90 89 88 GAGE HEIGHT DAILY RANGE 1981 -SKAGIT RIVER AT NEWHALEM TIME I~ DAYS 25 20 15 10 5 4 3 2 1 Fig. 5. Daily range in flow fluctuations in ft and cfa for Skagit River at Newhalem (USGS) for 1981. The mean daily discharges and the mean monthly discharges are also shown. - - - ..... 9 5.0 METHODS AND MATERIALS S.l E~capements. Spawner Distribution and Area Spawned 5 .. 1.1 Salmon Boat and aerial surveys (helicopter or· fixed wing) were conducted by WDF to estimate the Skagit system natural spawning escapements and distributions for chinook (summer-fall and spring), pink, chum and coho salmon. Aerial photographs of the Skagit River between Newhalem and the Sauk River were taken on October 6, 1980, two weeks after the peak of the chinook salmon run and on Octoner 11, 1981 to document the latter part of the chinook run and the peak of the pink salmon spawning 5.1.2 Steelhead The distribution and timing of ~eelhead spawning activity by river section was determined by plotting th• location of redds on recent aerial photos ot the river during periodic aerial spawning surveys. The length of time individual redds were visible frcm the air was established by marking artificial or natural redds and noting the elapsed time to obscurity. Estimates of redd life were developed by WDG steelhead management biologists. The information obtained frcm spawning survey~ was used in three ways. First, it enabled the location and subsequent relocation of a number of redds for ~udy of relationships between Gorge Powerhouse discharge and water depth in spawning areas. Secondly, these survey~ allowed the prediction of lecations and approximate timing of emergence of large concentrations of steelhead fry. The~e fry were subjects of stranding experiments during the summer. Third, the information from spawning surveys provided an estimate of total steelhead run size in the Skagit River. Total run size was used to 10 evaluate the relative strength of the naturally spawning steelhead population and to provide a baseline for comparison to future conditions. 5 •. 2 Adult Spawning-Flow Fluctuation Studies 5.2.1 Salmon Spawning Behavior Chinook salmon females selecting redd sites in less than two feet of water were chosen for study. Two methods were employed: the first involved marking individual female chinook which had initiated their spawning activity, and the second involved marking redds in the initial stages of construction. In the first few days of the study, chinook females were spotted digging redds in shallow-water and marked by snagging them on the back with a treble hook with a piece of surveyor flag attached. This method of tagging was abandoned becaase it was very difficult to be certain that the desired female was tagged. Actively spawning females were always accompanied by several males, and a positive determination of which fish in the group was marked was difficult. Subsequent marking was accompli3hed by entangling female chinook from selected redds with a drifted 6 1/2 inch mesh gill net. This capture method allowed for positive identification of females as well as determination of their condition, i.e., unspawned, partially spawned or ·spawned out. Peterson disk tags with tabs and flagging were utilized to mark the chinook females captured in the gill net. Color combinations were utilized to uniquely identify each female. The area sampled was from RM 78 to RH 83. Observations by boat and on foot were made daily to record spawning behavior patterns in the river in general and of marked females specifically. Concurrent with the marking of female chinook, redds located in depths of two feet or less were marked by placing painted rocks near the redd. Only those redds which were newly initiated were marked. These redds were monitored daily to determine when subsequent digging activity and eventual completion - - .~ - - - - 11 of the redds occurred. The fluctuating flows during the chinook study period were monitored via the U.S.G.S. stream gage at Marblemount (No. 12181000). The general flow conditions were monitored with spet checks of the gage, and details on daily flow fluctuations were determined from the U.S.G.S. flow records after the field observation period. The daily range of flow fluctuations during this study period were influenced by maintenance activity at Gorge Power House, which restricted generating capacity. This activity restricted the maximum powerhouse discharge to about one-half its normal maximum but did not influence IDinilllWII flows in 1981. Two sampling locations were selected for the marking of chum salmon females and observation of their spawning activity. These sites were the Thornton Creek side channel at RM 90 and Marblemount Slough at RM 78. These discrete spawning areas were selected because it was believed the best opportunity to mark unspawned females entering a spawning area occurred where subsequent observations could be made. To capture females for marking a 6 1/2 inch mesh gill net was set to block the study slough or side channel below an area of known spawning activity. The net was set at nightfall and fish were picked from the net fer tagging immediately after becoming entangled. Qnspawned and partially spawned females were marked fer individual identification with color-ceded Peterson disk tags with backup plastic tabs. The disks were 1 inch in diameter and the tabs were 3/4 inch wide by 3 inches long. Daily observations on.foct were made in Marblemount Slough to record the general spawning activity of chum salmon and the specific activity of the marked females. The spawning behavior of adult chinook and pink salmon was monitored in 12 the fall of 1981 by observing the activity around redds marked with painted rocks rather than marking individual females. 5.2.2 Steelhead Redd Depth -Flow Relationship In 1982, the method for developing relationships between flow and steelhead spawning was improved from that used in 1981. In 1981, redd depth was measured after each spawning survey flight, however; in adflition to measuring redd depths after spawning surveys, redds were marked with color- coded construction bricks in 1982. This additional feature allowed identification of individual redds long after each redd was no longer visible. This method provided the ability to determine the effects of unusually low flows (lower than observed in 1982) on steelhead spawning areas. 5.3 Instream Incubation Tests S.3e1 Steelhead Temperature Unit Requirements One ripe female steelhead and two males were obtained from the WDG Barnaby Slough rearing station on March 31, 1980. Eggs were stripped from the female and milt from the two males added to the eggs, mixed, and allowed to stand for 1 min. The eggs were rinsed several times, permitted to water- harden for 30 min and transported to three sites on the Skagit River at Newhalem (RM 92), Sutter Creek (RM 70), and Rockport below the Sauk (RM 65). Fifty eggs and 3/4 inch gravel were loaded in 17 oz P.erforated freezer containers. A set of ten containers was placed in each of three expanded metal cages which in turri were positioned on the river bottom at each of the three locations. Approximately six weeks after the fertilization and planting date of March 31, one container was removed from each location and subsequent containers removed at two-week intervals. A Ryan thermograph was used to monitor water temperature in the river near the incubation containers. 13 5.3.2 Flow Fluctuation Tests Field incubation studies were initiated with chum salmon in two side channels of the Skagit River in which this species was historically known to spawn. The upper site opposite the mouth of Thornton Creek at RM 90 is ~.2 mi downstream from Gorge Powerhouse and experiences the full magnitude of flow fluctuations. The lower site, designated Marblemount Slough, at RM 77.5 is 16.7 m1 downstream o~ Gorge Powerhouse and experiences somewhat dampened flow fluctuations due to unregulated tributary inflow. Skagit chum salmon eggs, fertilized on approximately December 10, 1979, were obtained from the Skagit Tribes Cooperative at the eyed stage on January 19, 1980. Groups o~ fifty eggs were mixed with 3/4 inch gravel and placed in either perforated plastic freezer containers or Whitlock-Vibert (W-V) boxes. Ten freezer containe" were positioned double-file, in 8-inch deep trenches and covered with substrate at each o~ four water depths. These water depths at the time of planting were 0.5', 1.0', 1.5' and 2.5' and corresponded to Newnalem and Marble1110unt gage heights of 85.07 ft and 4.17 ft, respectively. The eggs buried to 2.5' water depth ( -v 3.0' egg depth) were considered unlikely to be dewatered and served as controls. In addition, a Ryan thermograph was buried at each of the four artificial redd depths to determine the rate o~ temperature unit (TO) accumulation and to detect any significant temperature fluctuation that could be attributed to a dewatering event. Following planting, a freezer container and/or W-V box was removed every two weeks from each redd depth and the development stage and live-to-dead ratios of the eggs or alevins were recorded. The eggs were preserved in Stockard's solution and the alev1ns in 10 percent formalin for subsequent analysis. 14 analysi3. 5.4 Laboratory Incubation Tests 5.4.1 Experimental Facilities An experimental hatchery faci1ity was constructed at the Skagit Salmon Hatchery to test the effects of controlled flow fluctuations on salmonid eggs and alevins. The 116-m2 laboratory was supplied with fresh spring-fed Clark Creek water at the rate of 19 Lisee. This water was pumped through a 7 1/2 hp Peabody Barnes (Model 15 CCE) se1f-Priming centrifugal pump (with a second pump plumbed in tandem for back-up) into two head tanks located adjacent to the building. These tanks provided a 3-m head of water which was gravity-fed into a series of 16 1.22 by 2.44 m water tables (modified from Hickey et al. 1979). Each table (Fig. 6) was divided into four separately controlled compartments and contained a total of 128 10 em diameter by 38 em long PVC incubation cylinders. The cylinders had flat stock PVC bottoms and 8 screened 4 em diameter holes located 1D the lower 10 em (Fig. 7). Water entered a false bottom in each compartment and upwelled through each of 32 cylinders per section. Removal of a vertically adjustable plug near the bottom of each section dewatered that section to desired levels. 5.4.2 Artificial Redds In the first year of studies, eggs and milt were obtained from chinook salmon spawned at the University of Washington F13h Hatchery and tran3ported separately in cooled containers to the Skagit Salmon Hatchery. Groups of egg3 were then fertilized with water activated sperm as needed. Similar procedures were repeated with coho salmon obtained from the Skagit Salmon Hatchery and steelhead trout from Barnaby Slough steelhead rearing pond. A limited number Water outlet pipe ~ Water inlet from bead tank Inlet control valve for compartment Dewatering drain Fig.· 6. Diagram .. of experimental water table with section of false bottom and sides re1110ved to show water flow to several separately controlled compartments. 16 ---- GRAVEl. INTAKE Fig. 7. Artificial redd with section cut away to show egg placement in gravel. - - - 17 of chum salmon were acquired at the eyed egg stage from the Skagit Hatchery. Source~ of eggs for the second year of studies were the Skagit Salmon Hatchery for chinook and pink salmon, Nooksack Salmon Hatchery for chum salmon and the Barnaby Slough trap for steelhead trout. Following fertilization SO eggs were added to each cylinder which bad been half filled with gravel. The remainder of the cylinder was then f~lled with gravel. Water entered through the screened boles. upwelled through the gravel and flowed cut two 3.2 ma diameter holes drilled 2.5 em from the top cf each cylinder. The water velocity through each cylinder was set at 300 om/hr. A water bath continuously flowed around the upper halt of each cylinder tc maintain a controlled temperature fer dewatered eggs. Each dewatered cylinder retained about 5 em of water in the bottom to simulate a source of humidity likely tc occur in the natural environment. The four gravel sizes tested in 1980-81 were de~ignated as large (range from 1.35 tc 5.08 CDI), medii.IID (0.67 to 2.67 em), small (0.33 to 1.35 em} and mixed (0.08 tc 5.08 em). The mixed gravel approximated the gravel composition found in chinook redds sampled with a McNeil gravel sampler in the Skagit River. More extensive gravel sampling of chinook and pink salmon redds was undertaken With a freeze cere apparatus in 1981 and an artificial gravel composition which closely represented these results for beth species was used for all species and dewatering regimes tested 1n 1981-82. The large, medium and small gravel sizes were net tested in 1981-82. 5.~.3 Physical Parameters Physical parameters that were monitored during the study were temperature. humidity and dissolved oxygen. The water temperature in the head tank was recorded on a Ryan J-90 (three-month) thermograph. Temperatures in selected experimental redds were monitored in 1980-81 by probes connected to 18 an Applied Research Austin (AHA) electronic thermometer and Scanner (S0-20) and recorded on an ARA recorder (Model 400). During the first year relative humidity inside and outside the laboratory was measured daily with a Taylor sling psychrometer. The temperature monitoring system used in 1981-82 consisted of a multichannel Yellow Springs Instrument (YSI) Tale-Thermometer (Model 47TD) connected to a YSI strip chart recorder (Model 80A). 5.4.4 Experimental Design First year (198D-81) experiments designed to test the effects of static or dewatered conditions caused by flow reduction or cessation utilized a 9 x 4 factorial design. Static or dewatering times of 0 (control), 4, 8, 16 or 24 hrs (continuous). per day and the four gravel sizes previously described were tested. These experimental conditions were tested over two developmental stages of the embrya: 1) fertilization to eyed, and 2) eyed through hatching. Long-term effects were tested through the entire fertilization to hatching period. Not all experimental conditions were tested for each species due to shortages of eggs or design modifications. Experiments not performed are specifically mentioned in the results. Based on the first year's results, second year (1981-82) testing was reduced to one gravel size and dewatering times of 0, 2, 4, 8, 16, and 24 hrs per day. These dewatering times were tested over the developmental period extending from fertilization through hatching. In addition, single event dewatering experiments of alevins in artificial redds during the period from hatching to emergence were also undertaken. These dewatering times ranged from 1 to 24 hrs in duration. A large number of replicates was designed into each treatment to allow repetitive sampling without replacement. Sampling was conducted in duplicate the first year and in triplicate the second and consisted of removing randomly selected cylinders from each test compartment at various time intervals. The - - - 19 contents of individual cylinders were emptied onto a sampling table and the condition~ of all biological material wa~ examined and recorded. Sampling frequency was increa~ed as hatching began. All live embryos were placed in a compartmentalized Heath incubator the first year and allowed to develop at normal water flow. The second year live alevina from each test regime were placed in 10 percent formalin immediately after hatching. 5.~.5 Alevin and Fry Quality A sample of 30 alevins, or as many as were available i:f less, was removed from the Heath incubator at the button up stage from selected test conditions and preserved in 10 percent formalin. Each alevin wa~ patted dry and weighed on a toP-loading Mettler balance (PH 1210) to the nearest hundredth of a gram (0.01 g) and measured from the tip of the snout to the fork of the tail to the nearest halt millimeter. The formula used in computing condition factors was: s (weignt in g) x 10 (length in mm.) 3 A correction factor for the effect of prese~ation on length and weight changes over time was establi.shed by deteMDining the condition factors of four groups of 30 untested and Heath incubated alevins weighed and measured in the fresh state and on subsequent dates in the preserved state. ID the 1981-82 the quality of newly hatched alevins was determined by obtaining the yolk dry weights at the time o:f spawning and the body and yolk sac weights of alevins separately immediately after hatching in the following manner. A sample of 50 eggs was obtained from chinook, pink and chum salmon and steelhead at the time of spawning and placed in 10~ formalin. The membrane .surrounding the yolkwas remcved on a subsequent date ju~t prior to weighing. Alevins of each species and dewatering regime were removed immediately after hatching and placed in 10~ formalin. The bodies and yolk sacs were separated and subsequently weighed. Dry weights were determined for initial egg yolk, alevin bodies, and alevin yolk by drying for 24 hours at 103 C and weighing on a Mettler H20T analytical balance~ The body and yolk weights were expressed as a proportion of the initial yolk. The weight loss due to metabolism was then estimated with the following formula: llE - 1 -~1 + 11l ~o 1 oj where, ~E : change in weight due to metabolism Yo = initial. yolk weight y 1 : yolk weight of alevin b 1 : body weight of alevin 21 5.5 Intragravel Alevin Survival, M~vement and Behavior 5.5.1 Intragravel Behavior Studies in 1981 -Intragravel behavi~r studies were conducted in two different experimental chambers in 1981. Early studies on chin~~k were conducted in clear plexiglass cylinders similar to the standard PVC incubation cylinders. Later studies ~n . steelhead were in specially constructed plexiglas aquaria. These aquaria were 12.7 em wide 9 62 em high and 77 em lcng with twa water inlets for separately controlled laminar or upwelling flow (Fig. 8). In post-hatching sampling of all dewatered and statio artificial chino~k redds the number of alevins recovered frcm the bottom of the cylinder was recorded tc determine if intragravel movement had occurred. If the alevin had successfully moved tc the bottom of the cylinder in dewatered tests it could survive in the five om of water retained. Studies of later stage alevins were conducted i~ clear plexiglas -cylinders to facilitate observations ot movement. Samples of 10 pre-emergent alevins near button-up were placed in the flowing water above the gravel in plexiglas cylinders. The water was turned off and drained at the rate of 30 em per minute. The four gravel sizes tested were large, medium and small and mixed. After 30 minutes the cylinders were sampled and the relative location of the alevins· in each cylinder was recorded tc determine if intragravel movemen~ had occurred. Alevins that moved to the bottom of a cylinder could survive in the water retained. Posthatohing movement of coho alevins was determined by recording the number of alevins collected from the bottom of each cylinder at sampling time. Intragravel movement of later stages of pre-emergent coho alevins was observed in the clear plexiglas cylinders utilizing the same methods used for chinook - ~ 8\ r-- 0 • • • • • • ; • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • N • N • l • • '· I • · . • T • • • ; • ! i -- T ' Fig. 8. Alevin behavior chamber. - , .... - - 23 alevins. Immediate p~at-hatching mevement of steelhead alevins was recorded as the number of alevina successfully mcving to the b~ttom of the cylinder as in the chino~k and coho studies. More intensive observations were made on the later stages of pre-emergent steelhead alevins by utilizing the plexiglas aquarium. Steelhead alevina at various stages of development were placed in the · plexiglas aquaria and movement was recorded as water was drained at rates ranging from 2. 5 cm/hr" to 30 cm/hr. Laminar flow was wsed in all testa. 5.5.2 Intragravel Behavi~r Studies in 1982 The 1982 studies were conducted at the Fisheries Research Institute, University of Washington. The experimental stocks for these studies were obtained as eyed eggs f'rcm the Skagit Research Laboratory in Marblemcunt, Washington and tr~pcrted to the campus. The eggs were kept in a Heath Incubator inside a 10 x 12 x 8 foot room constructed ~f black polyethylene to maintain total darkness. Infrared lights illuminated the rccm while experiments were set up and data wu recorded. Lake Washingt~n water pumped to the laboratory was used in the Heath Incubator and all of the experimental tanks. Several different substrates were wsed during the behavi~r experiments. In early studies gravel was transported from the Skagit River and graded or mixed for different studies. Gravel sizes were the same used in egg incubation studies during the first year; large (1.35 to s.oa em), medium ( 0.67 to 2. 67 em) , small ( 0. 33 to 1. 35 em) and mixed ( 0. 08 to 5. 08 em) • In later experiments two sizes (large -2.16 em; small -1.1+4 em) of clear glass marbles were used to facilitate observati~ns of intrasubstrate movement or dispersal of alevins. The standardized size of the marbles and their interstitial spaces also eliminated the pr~blem of n~nunif~rm substrate 24 interferring with alevin movement by blocking passage in certain directions. 5.5.3 Aquaria Behavior Studies The procedures designed to study the ability of alevins to migrate to avoid dewatering utilized four speciallY designed plexiglass aquaria constructed to facilitate observations of alevins in the intragravel environment. These observation tanks were 7.5 em wide, 77 em long, and 62 em high (Fig. 9). Ihe tanka were filled with selected substrates and supplied with lateral water flow. Groups of 50 embryos or alevins were placed near the front viewing plate in these tanks and movement or behavior was recorded during the incu6ation experiments. Alevin traps were placed below the substrate to determine if there was a positive or negative rheotactic component involved in the alevin movement. Water velocity was adjusted and dissolved oxygen levels were monitored to determine if movement occurred under apparently favorable conditions. These aquaria tests were conducted on chinook and pink salmon alevins. The results obtained from these studies indicated that additional experiments would be necessary to test.the alevin responses to specific environmental variables. 5.5.4 Velocity Studies The procedures designed to study the alevins responses to velocity utilized a flow box (Fig. 10). The flow box was a simple wooden trough 30 em x 30 em x 90 em long with water entering one end of the trough and flowing through an enclosed gravel bed in the center and out a downstream stand pipe. A false bottom 5 em deep under the gravel bed was placed in the center of the trough to facilitate entrapment of the alevins which moved from the gravel. The appropriate gravel ccmposition for each species was determined from the literature. A lid was placed over the entire box to eliminate all light. A l -FLOW--+ ALE YIN TRAPS Fig. 9. Alevin behavior aquarium with alf;}vin traps underneath to determine rheotactic movement. OUTLET N lJl GRAVEL STAGING AREA ALEVIN TRAP Fig. 10. Alevin flow box for studies on effect of velocity on movement and behavior. N ()\ - -' - - .; \ 27 group of 30 alevins was placed in the enclosed gravel bed in the center of the trough and flows ranging from a om/sec; 0.5 to 1.0 om/sec, (medium}; and 1.5 to 2.5 om/sec, (high) were tested. These velocities were achieved by manipulating the water inlet valve. Alevin traps made from 1-1/2 inch PVC pipe were placed up and downstream frcm the gravel bed to determine the number and direction of alevin movement at each velocity. 5.5.5 Dissolved Oxygen Studies Experiments designed ta study alevin behavior related to oxygen levels utilized a Y-maze designed to test the ability of alevins to select between two water sources varying only in the concentration of dissolved oxygen (Fig. 11). These tests were designed to determine the lethal levels of dissolved oxygen and the ability of alevins to differentiate between different levels of this environmental parameter and =!grate toward the source of the least stress.. A range of levels frcm lethal to highly desirable was tested. Dissolved oxygen was regulated using a stripping tower with a counter flow of nitrogen gas to deoxygenate the inccaing water. Any desired level of dissolved oxygen could b& achieved by mixing this deoxygenated water with various quanti ties of oxygen saturated water. Dissolved oxygen levels were determined by using a YSI Model 54 oxygen meter and the azide modification of the iodemetric Winkler method (Standard methods). 5.5.6 Photobehavior Studies The procedures for testing pbotobehavior utilized a light-dark choice tank (Fig. 12). This r~ctangular aquarium (50 x 25 x 25 om) has a 21 om center partition dividing it into two equal compartments. The 4 om space beneath the partition allowed the alevins to migrate freely between the two sections. A lid was placed over one side or the other creating a dark and light compartment. After 15 minutes of adjustment time the alevins on the Fig. 11. Y-maze used in studies of alevin movement and behavior related to dissolved oxygen levels. OUTLET / / / / / / REV lift 81Bl.E LID LIGHT COMPARTMI:tH I I I I I / I --,-----, I I I I I 1 1 I ) )-- - - -L ---~ - - - I // I / I // .... . . Fig. 12. Light-dark choice box used in studies of photo-behavior. COMPARTMENT 30 light side were counted at one minute intervals for 10 minutes. The lid was then placed on the previous light side and similar counts were made. This test was to determine the photo behavioral response of the alevins. Light sources tested were fluorescent room lights, infrared spot lights, and direct sunlight. Light levels were determined by using a Li-cor Model LI-185 Quantum/Radiometer/Photometer. Objective seven tested the effect of developmental stage on alevin response to environmental stimuli. To accomplish this objective all of the preceeding experiments and observations were made at three stages of the development of the alevins whenever possible. The first test period was the early yolk sac fry shcrtly after hatching. The second period was at the mid- point of alevin development, and the final testing period was just prior to emergence. Testing at these stages of the incubation period was used to determine if changes in alevin response to environmental stimuli or ability to respond to those stimuli occurred. 5.6 Fry Standing 5.6.1 Salmon 5.6.1.1 Survey Sites and Techniques The gravel bars studied in this program are representative o£ the Skagit River between Hewhalem and the mouth of the Sauk River. The spacing of the study bars reflects a gradation in substrate composition, bar slope and tributary inflow. The average size of gravel bar substrate and bar slope decrease downstream. Conversely, the tributary inflow increases downstream. Three gravel bars on the Skagit River between the Gorge powerhouse and the confluence of the Sauk River were selected for examination. These were - - - 31 the Thornton Creek site No. 1 (RM 90.2), Marblemount Bar site No. 2· (RM 78.2) and Rockport Bar site No. 3 (RM 67.7) (Fig. 1). For the 1982 study the upstream study site No. 1 was moved to the County Line Bar (RM 89.0). Parallel transects twenty feet wide were spaced. along these bars at one hundred foot intervals, perpendicular to the flow line. During a stranding .> survey the areas within the transects were examined followed by the areas between the transects. This practice was discontinued after the second survey because the number ot fry within transects was low, and it was more efficient to survey back and forth between the high and low water lines from one end of a gravel bar to the other and back again. The observation crew initially consisted of two persons per gravel bar but with experience only one person per bar was required. All observations began at daybreak to prevent loss of fry on the study sites due to scavenging birds. The ob:s.ervers collected only fry which were visible without moving substrate material. The goal was to obtain a relative index of stranding at various ramp rates, not estimates of total number of fry killed. 5.6.1.2 Monitoring ot Fry Abundance An electroshocker, Smith Root Type VII. was u:sed to monitor the abundance ot t.ry along the study gravel bars. Electrofishing was conducted the afternoon prior to each downramp test. Two hundred feet of shoreline out to a depth of about 1.5 feet were sampled. During the 1980 sample period the area electrofished was two one-hundred foot sections separated by about 300 feet of shoreline. During the 1981 and 1982 sample periods the area electrofished was a continuous two hundred foot section of each gravel bar. 5.6.1.3 Stream Flow Seattle City Light regulated the discharge at Gorge powerhouse according to a request to provide prespecified downramp rates between a high flow of 32 greater than 5,000 cfs and a minimum flow of 2,300 cfs. Comparisons were made between the U.S.G.S. records for the Newhalem (No. 12-1780) and Marblemount (No. 12-1810) gages to determine the level of tributary inflow during the downramp tests. The flow comparison was made during the stable minimum flow period folloWing each downramp cycle. 5.6.1.4 Index of Stranding The counts of all try found stranded Within the survey area of each study gravel bar were recorded by species. The raw count of stranded salmon fry was converted to an index number by the following steps: 1) Adding one to the count. This data transformation created numbers which could be adjusted by the abundance data and resulted in an integer value wbich facilitated presentation and comparison of stranding indices. 2) Dividing by the salmon fry abundance factor. This was done to adjust for fluctuating fry abundance. Assuming all other variables equal, a change in try abundance adjacent to the study sites would change tbe stranding rate and the change would be directly proportional to the change in fry abundance. The abundance factor was computed by dividing the number of fish sampled on each occasion by tbe lowest number of fish obtained·for a given site. Thus the day with tbe lowest fry abundance for a given site in a given year has a factor of 1.0. The abundance factor was computed independently for each year because the locations for electrofisbing within each study site were changed between years. 5.6.1.5 Time Factor During the course of the field studies it became evident that portions of study gravel bars dewatered after dawn had a substantially greater - - - ,.o1i,"· - 33 occurrence of stranded try than the portions dewatered prior to dawn. This was ~st evident at the Rockport Bar site during 1982 when tributary inflow was more stable than during 1980 and 1981. Several of the downramping tests in 1982 were modified to alter the timing of the downramp occurrence-at similar downramp rates. This manipulation in study procedure produced dramatic shifts in stranding rates. As a result of these observations and data collection the entire data base- 1980-1982 was evaluated to deteMIIine the time of downramping at each site relative to dawn. Dawn was standardized as one-half hour prior to sunrise as measured at Seattle, Washington. A time factor was computed for each test and study site by subtraction of the time of dawn tram the time of maximum gravel bar dewatering following downramp. Those occasions where the computation resulted in a negative number (i.e., prior and equal to dawn) the time factor was a.saigned a value of 1.0. This was done based on the assumption that all dewatering in darkness was equivalent in terms of light effect on the-incidence of stranding. The value ot 1.0 was added to the remaining positive values. The delay time for dewatering at each study site was determined by placement and monitoring of site specific starr gages. Detailed observation of the site specific gages was conducted on 19 and 30 March 1982 to establish the relationship between completion of a dowaramping event at Newhalem and completion of dewatering at the study sites (Appendix II, Tables 1A and 18). 5.6.2 Steelhead Investigations in 1982 were directed toward determination of the effects of fluctuating water levels resulting from power generation on stranding of steelhead fry. Conditions in 1981 did not permit controlled fry stranding experiments, however, the 1982 season proved .excellent once the snowmelt 34 runoff had subsided. Due to limitations on available staff, two study sites were selected. One was the river bar at the Skagit County Park at Rockport; the other was at Marblemount on the right bank just above the mouth of the Cascade River. Both of the these sites were previously used in studies of chinook fry stranding. These sites were easily accessible and it was possible to sample both on the same day during one low water event. Both of these sites were near areas of high steelhead spawning activity and were expected to have a large number of fry. In an effort to minimize variability, each stranding experiment was repeated on two consecutive days. Also only one variable was changed at a time. For example, if ramp rate were changed for an experiment, timing and magnitude of the change were held constant. !he experimental condition was a downramp of 2000 cfs per hour, timed so that the minimum flow at Newhalem of 1400 cfs was reached by midnight. High flow at Gorge during the stranding test series was approximately 5700 cfs each day. The tests were scheduled on consecutive days, Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays, since these days had the best potential to provide identical conditions from day to day. At both sites a known length of bar (425 feet at Rockport and 300 feet at Marblemount) was systematically inspected and all stranded try collected. The river level had dropped to the minimum at either of the sites by daylight. Sampling began at dawn and continued until no additional fry could be found. Usually, this. occurred by mid-morning when the bars had dried. Electrofishing to determine fry abundance was done on rising flows on the day prior to the fry stranding test. - - 35 6.0 RESULTS 6.1 Escapements, Spawner Distribution and Area Spawned 6 .. 1.1 Salmon The data presented in this section update those previously eompiled by Graybill et al. (1979). The Skagit system natural spawning escapements estimated for 1978-1981 by WDF fer su111111er-fall chintJCk, pink, chum and coho salmon are presented in Table 1. The escapement levels for summer-fall chinook, pink, and coho were generally comparable to previous years. A particularly :strong high cycle (even-year) escapement was estimated for chum salman in 1978 (115,200) and a less than average escapement in 1980 (21,350). Escapement levels to the Skagit Hatchery racks for 1978 to 1981 are shown in Table 2. Coho were most abundant and ranged from 11,078 to ~o. 08~. chinook 88 to 1 , 010 followed by pink and chum salmon. Tables 3, 4, and 5 list ehinook salmem redd counts made by WDF from helicopter and fixed Wing surveys from 1977-1981. As in past years, twe river sections, Bacon Creek to Diobsud Creek, and Diobsud Creek to Cascade comprising 17.7 percent of the river Miles above the Sauk accounted for approximately ~0 percent cf the total spawning. Aerial photcgraph:s were taken of the Skagit River between Newhalem and the Sauk River on October 6, 1980. The percentage distribution of redds observed in most river sections were similar to the percentages of redds counted in those sections from helicopter and fixed-wing surveys (!able 6). The total area spawned as determined frem the photographs was 58.810 m2 or 2,162 m2/mi. The river section With the greatest area spawned per river mile (5.365 m2), was Diobsud Creek to Cascade River (Table 7). The date on which 36 Table 1. Estimated Skagit River system spawning escapements (Washington Department of Fisheries).l Year 1978 1979 1980 1981 Summer-fall chinook 13,209 13,605 20,345 8,670 Pink 336,000 - 100,000 ~F -R. Orrell, personal communication. ~vised from 1976 and 1977 tagging studies. Chum Coho ll5 ,200 2 9,800 16,575 28,000 21,350 21,000 12,500 15,900 r--- 37 ,.-. Table 2. Salmon escapement to the Skagit Hatchery racks 1978-1981.1 Year Coho Chi.ncok Pink Chum 1978 ll,078 88 284 -1979 11,792 267 384 a 1280 2l,893 1,010 17 1981 40,084 45G 153 lwnr, J. Clayton, personal communication. Table 3. Chinook salmon redd counts made by the Washington Department of Fisheries from helicopter and fixed-wing surveys of the Skagit liver from Newhalem to the Sauk River. (Surveys made on September 26, 1977 and September 14 and 20 and October 4 and 30, 1978) Number of Percent of rercent of redds total redds River total River section 1977 1978 '1977 1971 miles river ailea Newhalea to County Lina 142 444 11.4 11.4 4.8 11.6 County Lina to Copper Creek 79 132 . 6.3 3.4 5.1 18.8 SUBTOTAL (NBWllALEK TO COffD CIBU) 221 576 11.1 14.7 9.9 36.4 Copper Creek to Bacon Cnek 107 210 8.6 5.4 1.4 5.1 w 00 Bacon Creek to Diobsud Creek 173 404 13.8 10.3 2.2 8.1 Diobsud Creek to Cascade liver 321 940 25.7 24.0 2.6 9.6 Cascade River to CorkiDdale Creek 205 799 16.4 20.4 4.0 14.7 Corkindale Creek to Illabot Creek 30 2.4 2.5 9.2 Illabot Creek to Sauk River 194 984 15.5 25.1 4.6 16.9 SUBTOTAL (COfPEB. CREEK. TO SAUl. IIVEil) 1030 3337 23.3 85.3 11.3 63.6 TOTAL (NEWHALEH to 8Atlk IIVHR) 12Sl 3913 lOO 100 27.2 100 ) 1 ) Table 4. Chinook salmon redd counts made by the Was~ington Department of Fisheries from helicopter and fixed-wing surveys of the Skagit River from Newhalem to the Sauk River. (Surveys made on September 15 and October 5, 1979 and September 9 and 26 and October 23, 1980) Number of Percent of Percent of redds total redda River total River section 1979 1980 1979 1980 mile a river miles Newhalem to County Line 274 383 10.9 10.9 4.8 11.6 County Line to Copper Creek 128 151 5.1 4.3 5.1 18.8 SUBTOTAL (NEWHALEH TO COPPER CREEK) .402 534 15.9 15.2 9.9 36.4 Copper Creek to Bacon Creek 263 147 10.4 4.2 1.4 ·S .1 w Bacon Creek to Diobaud Creek 343 547 13.6 15.6 2.2 8.1 \.0 Diobsud Creek to Cascade River 664 847 26.3 24.1 2.6 9.6 Cascade River to Corkindale Creek 211 403 8.6 11.5 4.0 14.7 Corkindale Creek to lllabot Creek 215 182 8.5 5.2 2.5 9.2 Illabot Creek to Sauk River 418 848 16.6 24.2 4.6 16.9 SUBTOTAL (COPP~R CREEK TO SAUK RIVER) 2120 2974 84.1 84.8 11.3 63.6 TOTAL (NEWIIA.LEM TO 5AUIC. RIVER) 2522 3508 100 100 27,2 100 Table 5. Chinook salmon redd counts made by the Washington Department of Fisheries from helicopter and fixed-wing surveys of the Skagit River from Newhalem to the Sauk River. (Surveys made on September 8 and October 14, 1981) Number of Percent of Percent of redds total redds River total River section 1981 1981 miles river miles Newhalem to County Line 93 9.4 4.8 17.6 County Line to Copper Creek 76 7.7 5.1 18.8 SUBTmTAL (NE~EM TO COPPER CREEK) 169 17.1 9.9 36.4 Copper Creek to Bacon Creek 51 5.2 1.4 5.1 Bacon Creek to Diobsud Creek 168 17.0 2.2 8.1 Diohsud Creek to Cascade River 229 23.2 2.6 9.6 Cascade River to Corkindale Creek 81 8.2 4.0 14.7 Corkindale Creek to Illabot Creek 33 3.3 2.5 9.2 Illabot Creek to Sauk River 258 26.1 4.6 16.9 SUBTmTAL (COPPER CREEK TO SAUK RIVER) 820 82.19 17.3 63.6 TOTAL (NEWHALEM TO SAUK RIVER) 989 100 27.2 100 -1'- 0 ' ,, --J l Table 6. Chinook salmon redd counts from aerial photographs of the Skagit River from Newhalem to the Sauk River in 1980. [Photographs taken on October 6, 1980). River section Newhalem to County Line County Line to Copper Creek SUBTOTAL (NEWHALEH TO COPPER CREEK) Copper Creek to Bacon Creek Bacon Creek to Diobsud Creek Diobsud Creek to Cascade River Cascade River to Corkindale Creek Corkindale Creek to Illabot Creek Illabot Creek to Sauk River SUBTOTAL (COPPER CREEK TO SAUK RJVER) TOTAL (NEWHALEM TO SAUK RIVER) Number of redds 100 57 87 221 375 :J-64 123 459 151 1424 1581 Percent of total redds 6.3 3.6 9.9 5.2 14.0 23.7 10.4 7.8 29.0 90.1 100 Percent of River total miles river miles 4.8 17.6 5.1 18.8 9.9 36.4 1.4 5.1 2.2 8.1 2.6 9.6 4.0 14.7 2.5 9.2 4.6 16.9 11.3 63.6 27.2 100 J Table 7, Area spawned by chinook salmon as determined from aerial photographs of the Skagit River from Newhalem to the Sauk River. [Photographs taken on October 6, 1980] River section Area spawned (m 1 x 10 5 ) Newhalem to County Line County Line to Copper Creek SUBTOTAL (NEWHALEM TO COPPER CREEK) Copper Creek to Bacon Creek Bacon Creek to Diobaud Creek 3.72 2.12 3.05 8.22 Diobaud Creek to Cascade River 13.95 Cascade River to Corkindale Creek 6.10 Corkindale Creek to Il1abot Creek 4.58 Illabot Creek to Sauk River 17.10 5.84 SUBTOTAL (COPPER CREEK TO SAUK RIVER) 52.97 TOTAL (NEWHALEM TO SAUK RIVER) 58.81 ,· Percent of total area spawned 6.3 3.6 9.9 5.2 14.0 23.7 10.4 1.8 29.1 90.1 100 Area spawned per river mile (m 2 /mi) 115 416 2,119 3,736 1.832 2.162 590 River miles 4.8 5.1 1.4 2.2 2.6 4.0 2.5 4.6 9.9 17.3 27.2 Percent of total river miles 17.6 18.8 36.4 5.1 8.1 9.6 14.7 9.2 16.9 63.6 100 - - - '1 . 43 the aerial photographs were taken coincided with a time of relatively low flow, Marblemount mean gage height of 2.06 ft. Examination of the aerial photographs did not reveal any redds dewatered at this stage. other low-flow days and Marblemount gage heights during the chinook spawning season were as follows: September 16 -1.89; September 17 -2.08; September 18 -2.03; . ~ September 27 - 1 • 96; and September 28 - 1 • 89. The minimum flow on any or these dates was 1.80 on September 18. The difference between this gage height reading or 1.80 tt and 2.06 ft on October 6 is 0.25 ft and consequently it is unlikely that any chinook redds were dewatered during the spawning season. Salmen production in the Skagit River is supplemented by the Skagit Salmon Hatchery located near Marblemount which is maintained and operated by the Washington Department of Fisheries. Fish production from the Skagit Hatchery and fish plants in the Skagit system between Boyd Creek (river mile (RMJ ~4.7) and Newhalem are summarized in Table 8 for the period 1978 to 1982. !he principal species produced in recent years have been spring-summer-fall chinook and coho salmon. 6.1.2 Steelhead Trout The Skagit system naturally spawning steelhead escapements for 1977-1978 to 1981-1982 estimated by WDG are summarized in Table 9. These are the first years for which escapement estimates were available, so comparisons With previous years are not possible. Aerial surveys were conducted during the 1979 to 1982 steelhead spawning seasons for the Skagit and Sauk rivers by WDG. Steelhead redd counts from these surveys are presented 1n Tables 1Q-13. Spawning generally commenced in mid-March and extended through June. Peak counts or 67. ~27, and 299 in the mainstem Skagit and 73. 23, and 209 in the Sauk occurred on June 9. 1980, May 22, 1981, and May 13, 1982, respectively. In 1979 surveys were not conducted 4.4 Table 8 • Fish production of the Skagit Hatchery and fish plants by WDF in the Skagit system £ram Boyd Creek (river mile 44 • 7) to Newhalem, 1978-1982. Number of Fish Fish plants by WDF in the Skagit system Year Brood Skagit Hatchery from Boyd Creek planted year . Species production to Newhalem --r.- 1982 1980 Summer chinook ·(yd* 808,768 808,768 1981 Fall chinook (fg) 5,995,600 2,100,322 1981 Coho (fr) 1,250,680 449,580 1981 Coho (fg) 1~931,100 404,500 1980 Coho . (yr) 1,548,933 340' 700 ---. -... 1981 1979 Spring chinook (yr) 53,881 53,881 1980 Summer chinook (fg) 570,840 570,840 1979 Summer chinook (yr) 242,358 242,358 1980 Fall c!dnook (fg) 720,987 720,987 1979 Fall chinook (yr) 559,507 559,507 1980 Coho (fg) 485,000 480,000 1980 Coho ·cfr) 1,464,940 0 1979 Coho (yr) 1,126,594 657,276 -·------- 1978 Spring chi.nook (yr) 18,950 18,950 1980 1978 Summer chinook (yr) 463,539 463,539 1979 Fall chinook (fg) 1,lll,250 1,lll,250 1978 Fall chinook (yr) 581,047 581,047 1979 Coho (.fgl 820,165 459,514 1978 Coho (yr) 2,154,250 991,150 1979 Chum (.fr) 7,656 . 7,656 1979 1978 Spring chinook (fg) 1,872 1,872 1977 Spring chinook (yr) 72,501 51,080 1977 Summer chinook (yr) 397,000 397,000 1978 Fall chinook (fg) 961,289 961,289 1977 Fall chinook (yr) 779,000 779,000 1978 Coho {fr) 1,079,448 955,032 1977 Coho (yr) 919,398 743,510 1978 1977 Sprlng chinook (yr) 10,080 10,080 1976 Spring chinook (yr) 22,051 22,051 1977 Summer chinook (yr) 147,900 147,900 1976 Summer chinook (yrl 147,066 147,066 1977 Fall chinook (fg) 119,848 119,848 1976 Fall chinook (fg) 149,862 149,862 1977 Coho (.fg) 1,358,456 1~050,647 1976 Coho (yr) 1,169,830 753,598 1977 Chum (fg) 5,820,000 5,820,000 1977 Pink (fg) 4,300,000 4,300,000 * yr • yearling (270 + days reared) fg • fingerling (14-269 days reared) fr • fry (0-14 days reared) ·-45 Table 9. Est::iJDated Skagit R:Lver system steelhead spawn:i.ng escapements QmG) • Mainstem Skagit: Tributaries 1977-1978 1425 5869 1978-1979 913 3030 -1979-1980 1248 47611 -1980-1981 1897 3538 1981-1982 3362 6422 """' - Table .10. Summary of ateelhead trout redd coqnta from aerial aurveya of mainstem Skagit and Sauk Rivera, 1979 (WDG). SKAGIT RIVER River Section Newhalea to Bacon Creek Bacon Creek to Cascade liver Cascade River to Sauk River Sauk River to Baker River Baker River to Sedro Woolley Sedro Woolley to Ht. Vernon SAJJK RIVER River Section Total Mouth to Suiattla River Suiattle River to Darrinaton Bridge Darrington Bridge to White Chuck River White Chuck River to Sauk River forks Sauk River forks to North Fork falls Total (11.3 mi) ( 4.8 mi) (11.1 ad) (10.5 mi) (33.1 mi) {11.4 mi} (82.8 mi) (13.2 mi) ( 8.2 mt) (10.5 mi) ( 7.8 ad) { 1.4 mi} (41.1 ud) Steelhead Redd Counts -1979 (WDG) 3/22 4/19 12 (e) 11 (a) 2 (f) 9 (f) 28 38 25 34 21 66 0 2 86 160 6 16 4 36 0 (d) 3 (d) (a) (a) -{a} (a) 10 55 .p. "' \ I Table 11. Summary of steelbead trout redd counts from aerial surveys of mainstem Skagit and Sauk Rivers, 1980 (WDG). Stee1head Bedd Counts -1960 (WDG) 3/06 3/21 4/05 4/21 5/07 6/09 SKAGIT RIVER River Section Newhalem to Bacon Creek (11.3 mi) 0 0 0 1 2 7 Bacon Creek to Cascade River ( 4.8 mi) 0 0 0 2 1 16 Cascade River to Sauk River (11.1 mi) 1 3 5 3 26 17 Sauk River to Baker River (10.5 mi) 0 11 15 (b) 6 9 Baker River to Sedro Woolley (33.7 mi) 1 (b) 10 9 (b) 10 18 Sedro W~olley to Kt. Vernon ~11.4 Dli~ {b} 0 0 {b} 0 0 Total (82.8 mi) 1 30 29 5 .51 67 SAUK RIVER "" ,..._. River Section Mouth to Suiattle River (13.2 mi) 0 3 15 (b) (b) 4 Suiattle River to Darrington Bridge ( 8.2 mi) 0 3 5 (b) (b) 19 Darrington Bridge to White Chuck River (10.5 mil (a) (a) (a) (b) (b) (d) White Chuck River to Sauk River forks ( 7.8 mi) (a) (a) (a) (b) (b) (a) Sauk River forks to North Fork falls { 1.4 mi} {a) {a} {a} {b) {b} (a) Total (41.1 mi) 0 6 20 23 \ ' . Table -12. Summary of steelhead trout redd counts from aerial surveys of mainstem Skagit and Sauk Rivers, 1981 (WDG). Steelhead Redd Counts -1981 (WDG) 3/03 3/17 4/02 4/13 5/12 5/22 6/04 6/25 SKAGIT RIVER River Section Newhalem to Bacon Creek (11.3 mi) 0 1 1 1 17 62 37 2 Bacon Creek to Cascade River ( 4.8 mi) 0 3 2 1 22 66 50 23 Cascade River to Sauk River (11.1 mi) 2 6 22 23 158 176 92 69 Sauk River to Baker River (10.5 mi) 2 11 15 20 43 37 (b) (b) Baker River to Sedro Woolley (33. 7 mi) 0 4 7 15 68 84 (b) (b) Sedro Woolley to Mt. Vernon {11.4 mi} 0 0 0 0 {a~ 2 {b~ {b) Total (82.8 mi) 4 25 47 60 308 427 179 94 .J:- SAUK RIVER co River Section Mouth to Suiattle River (13.2 mi) 0 1 5 5 (a) 7 (b) (b) Suiattle River to Darrington Bridge ( 8.2 mi) 0 3 3 1 (a) 61 (b) (b) Darrington Bridge to White Chuck River (10.5 mi) (a) 1 l (d) 0 (d) (a) 5 (d) (b) (b) m1ite Chuck River to Sauk River forks ( 7.8 mi) (a) (a) (a) (a) (a) (a) 5 (b) Sauk River forks to North Fork falls { 1.4 mi) {a) {a) (a) {a) {a) {a) (b) (b) Total (41.1 mi) 0 5 9 6 73 .. ). Table 13 •. Summary of ateelhead Rivera. 1982 (WDG). SKAGIT RIVBR:.'. River Section Newhalem to Bacon Creek Bacon Creek to Cascade· River Cascade River to Sauk River Sauk River to Baker River Baker River to Sedro Woolley Sedro Woolley to Ht. Vernon Total SAUK RIVER River Section Mouth to Suiattle River Suiattle River to parrington Bridge Darrington Bridge to White Chuck River M1ite Chuck River to Sauk River forks Sauk River forks to North Fork falls Total (a) No Count (b) Too turbid to count (c) Peak count l , .. :. . J trout redd counts from aerial surveys of mainstem Skagit and Sauk Steelhead Redd Counts -1982 (WDG) 2/26 3/16 4/6 4/26 5/13 6/2 (11.'3 mi) (a) (e) 0 (e) 0 (e) 0 (e) 1 (e) 4 (e) ( 4. 8 llli) 0 (f) 0 (f) 1 (f) 3 (f) 16 (f) H (f) (11.1 mi) 9 8 18 64 132 92 (10.5 mi) 0 2 16 42 64 (b) (33.7 mi) 0 (b) 47 75 75 (b) {11.4 mi) 0 0 0 .5 0 {b) (82.8 mi) 9 10 82 189 299 109 "" 1.0 (13.2 mi) 0 0 8 20 11 (b) ( 8.2 mi) 0 0 12 61 88 (b) (10.5 mi) (a) 0 (d) 2 19 37 (b) ( 7.8 mi) (a) (a) (a) 1.5 13 (b) ( 1.4 mi) (a) {a) (a) ~ {a) {a) (41.1 mi) 0 0 22 11.5 209 0 (d) Incomplete count (e) Newhalem to Ala Creek (9.0 mi) (f) Alma Creek to Cascade River (7.1 mi) 50 beyond April, so a peak count was net obtained. Based en the 1980 and 1981 peak counts approximately 80 percent of the redds were located. in the mainstem Skagit (Sedrc Woolley to Newhalem) with 20 percent in the mainstem Sauk (primarily from the mouth to Darrington). However, the higher visibility in the SaUk in 1982 indicated a peak count distribution of 60~ mainstem Skagit and 40~ mainstem Sauk. The section of the Skagit mainstem most heavily spawned extended from the Cascade River to the Sauk River. Bath timing of peak spawning activity and distribution or spawning in 1982 were different from the previous year. In 1981, spawning activity peaked in mid-May, however, in 1982 the peak came nearly two weeks earlier. Between April 2 and Hay 12. 1981 just under 30 percent of the spawning upstream from the Sauk River had occurred. In 1982. between AprU 6 and May· 13 for that same reach 65 percent of the total had spawned. While these percentages may not be absolute proportions. they do provide a strong indication that spawning in 1982 peaked earlier than in 1981. High counts in mid-May shewn on Table 13 reflect spawning taking place prior to the time of each survey. Redd life in 1982 was 16 to 22 days and in mid-May was almost 20 days, therefore redds observed on May 13 could have been dug as early as late April. The distribution of spawning activity chansed from 1981 to 1982 with fewer f1sh spawning above the mouth of the Cascade River. In 1982, of the spawning above the Sauk River, 37.1 percent was observed between the mouth of the Sauk and Illabot Creek; 52.9 percent between Illabot and the mouth of the Cascade River; and 10 percent above the Cascade. Since 1974 the spawning above the Sauk has been distributed as follows: to Illabot -33.5 percent; Illabot to Cascade-41.2 percent; above Cascade -25.3 percent. These values are mean percent distributions for 1974 to 1982. The annual percent ·-- ·-' - 51 distributions are presented in !able 14. Even though spawning distribution varied considerably from year to year, no significant trends or patterns are present. A two-way analysis of variance at the 0.05 level on these distributions failed to reject the hypothesis of no difference between reaches through the years. Steelhead catch statistics fer the Skagit River system, calculated and compiled by the WDG, are presented fer the period 1977 to 1982 fer winter-run sport harvest (Table 15), summer-run sport harvest (Table 16), and Skagit sy3tem treaty Indian harvest (Table 17). 6.2 Adult Spawning -Flew Fluctuation Studies 6.2.1 Salmen Spawning Behavior 6.2.1.1 Chinook The tlows during the chinook observation period in September-october· 1980 were relatively stable aa indicated in the hourly gage height records at the Marblemount gage (Figs. 13 and 14). The mean change in river stage fer the . observation period waa 0.80 feet with a maximum of 2.43 feet on September 19 and a minimum of .11 feet on September 16. The overall range in river height tor the entire observation period was 2.52 feet. This represents a range of news at Marblemount from 1, 770 cfs to 9, 030 cfs. The mean discharge for the study period was 3,570 cfs measured at Marblemount. The tagging locations and identifying colors for the 29 female chinook tagged fr~ 9/3/60 to 9/16/80 are presented in Appendix III, Table 1. Only 9 (31 percent) of the marked females were completely unspawned at the time of marking. This is an indication of the high degree of difficulty associated With capturing these "target" fish. It should be noted that the use of Table 1''· Percent Distribution Steelhead Spawning Above Sauk River 1974 ·to 1982, Percent Percent Percent Year Sauk River to Illabot Greek Illabot Greek to Cascade River Above Cascade River 1974 32.3 49.0 18.7 1975 46.2 36.1 17.1 1976 25o0 28.6 46.4 1977 34.1 34.6 31.3 1978 34.6 39.1 26.3 1979 38.0 28.0 34.0 1980 43.0 17.4 39.6 1981 28.2 43.2. 28.6 ll1 N 1982 37.1 52.9. 10.0 1974 to 1982 111ean 33.5 41.2. 25.3 l ... -. -i -I _, .~· - 53 Table lS. Sport harvest of Skagit system winter-run (November-April) steelhead trout, 1977-1978 through 1981~1982. £Tom creel census data OIDG). Year Skagit Sauk Suiattie Cascade Total. 1917-1978 2383 178 82 2643 1978-1979 4027 211 5 4243 1972-1280 3058 248 8 33~4 1980-198~ 2270 172 21 2469 1981-1982 2040 135 31 2206 54 Table 16. Sport harvest of Skagit system summer run (May-October) steelhead trout, 1977-1981 (WDG). Figures are corrected for nonresponse bias~ Year Skag:it Suiattle Cascade Sauk Total 1977 281 21 42 60 383 1978 210 139 393 1979 197 20 71 288 1980 341 61 160 562 1981 353 86 90 529 """" &,, .-. ~ 55 Tabla 17-. Skagi~ system Treaty Indian harvest of winter-run steelhead, 1977-1978 ~hrough 1981-1982 (WDG). Year Steelhead taken 1977-1978 4250 1978-1979 4886 1979-1980 4199 1980-1981 2.949 1981-1982 2697 SKAGIT R. AT MARBLEMOUNT -SEPTEMBER 1980 I-w w IJ... z t-t I- t3 t-t w :r: ~ ffi II • ., I a I ·~ ·~ 1 .. I ·~ '! Fig. 13, St.IOlY tQmY TUE60f1Y WEIK600Y TtlJftBDAY fRIOOY 8RltJWAY ....... 1 2 3 4 5 6 : -1 b t l:s Ei 12 ::1 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 I '1 :::I I ~I l r;w ~ 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 I . I I I I ....., J I 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 I ;; =I w I I I I 28 29 30 Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS), September 1980. l.Tt "' ] l J ~ 1 SKAGIT R. AT MARBLEMOUNT -OCTOBER 1980 6lHllY tomY Tl£800Y WD£60flY rtm600Y fftiOOY 8811.1QlY '! I 1 I;;; d8 Is~ l I 1 2 3 4 '! I I J b mJt ~ l .,.._ w ~ -7 z 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 t-t '! j Li -L: I _; I ~I ~ j .,.._ VI 5 ...... t-t 7" w :r: 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 ~ '! iii I I I I I I 8i t 19 . 20 21 22 23 24 25 '! I ~ I I I ~ I 26 27 28 29 30 31 Fig. 14. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS), October 1980. . 58 flagging glued to the plastic strip was discontinued after the 20th fish was tagged. !he flagging lacked durability and tore from the plastic strips in one to three days after liberation of the marked fish. The locations and activity of the observed marked females are presented in Appendix III, Table 2. The general conditions for observation of the chinook spawning activity and marked females were generally good (Appendix III, Table 3). A chronological summary of tagging and observation dates is presented in Appendix III, Table 4). Five of the chinook females tagged with I the Peterson disk tags-were not seen after liberation. Four of these were partially spawned at the time of tagging and the stress of the tagging operation may have caused a delayed mortality in these fish. The majority (13 of 21) of the females observed after marking were seen the next day in the vicinity of their redds. The determination that marked females were spawned out was the result of recapturing marked females while attempting to capture additional females for marking. There was some variance in behavior but individual females generally returned to the same redd once it had been started. Only one female (No. 5) was observed spawning in two different locations. It was also noted that females stayed at their redds through moderate changes in flow. It was not uncommon to see females occupying redds with six inches to a foot of water over their backs remain on these redds when reduced flows partially exposed their backs. When further flow reductions nearly completely dewatered some active redds the females left the redds but returned later after flo¥s increased. While observing redds marked with painted rocks only two redds out of twenty-five were judged not to have been completed. Both of these were started during a high flow period associated with a rain storm. After the - - - - 59 rain storm these redds were frequently dewatered. The general pattern of activity indicated that the female chinook would complete their redds if the flow levels provided adequate flows over the redd site for at least several hours each day. 6. 2. 1. 2 .£!!!!!! !he flows during the chum salmon spawning period (November-December 1980) were moderately high and very stable (Figs. 15 and 16). Spot checks of the Marblemount gage indicated flowa ranging between 5. 950 cfs and 8, 950 cfs over the entire observation period, which resulted in a river height fluctuation of o.ao feet. The u.s.G.S. records were not examined for this period because there were no observed flow fluctuations which restricted the spawning distribution or activity of the chua salmon. The tagging locations and identifying colors for the 1 female chum tagged frcm December 1, 1980 to December 7, 1980 are presented in Appendix III, Table 5. The small number of "target" females tagged is partially a reflection of the small chum escapement in 1980 and the degree of difficulty involved in capturing unapawned females on the spawning grounds. The locations and activity of the observed marked females are presented in Appendix III, Table 6. The general conditions for observation of chum spawning activity and marked females (Appendix III, Table 7) were fair to excellent. A chronological summary of tagging and observation dates is presented in Appendix III, Table 8. The marked females were seldom observed on redds. Only 4 of the 16 observations of marked females were of females on redds. !here were no occasions when chum females were forced form their redds by reduced flows. It is possible that the tagging of the females or the presence of observers discouraged them from remaining on or near their redds. Another possibility is that the low density of spawners gave the females SKAGIT R. AT MARBLEMOUNT -NOVEMBER 1980 1-w w I.L z ....... 1- ~ ..... w :t: '! ll • 1 I I I SlimY I 2 tomY TlESDRY I I 3 4 I£M500Y nuumv fRIIIlY SRTI.filllY I I I 1 5 6 I ts '!1~-------~--1 ---~-1 -~--1 -~-1 --------~--1 -~-1---~1 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 u I ., 6 a I u I 1 fi I I --- 16 17 --·---23 24 18 19 20 21 12 25 26 27 2ts 2~ '!r-----t--------t----1---f---..1-1 -~-1-----~1 30 Fig. 15. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS), November 1980. CJ'I 0 j ' . 1 ·SKAGIT R. AT MARBLEMOUNT·-DECEMBER 1980 St.IOIY tOOrf ll£500Y IEIJ£500Y nuumv fRIOOY 6Alli«»>Y ·~ I I I I I I I 1 2 l 4 5 6 '! I I I I I I I .._ w w lL z 7 8 9 10 11 12 ll ....... 1 I ~ I ~ -I I ~ .._ 0\ . ~ ""' ....... w :I: 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ~ '! ~ ~ I I I oP~~ L. I I 8i ~ 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 '! I I I I I I I 28 29 30 31 Fig. 16. Hourly gage height data for Skagit Rtver at Marblemount (USGS), December 1980. 62 little incentive to guard their redds. For whatever reason, the small amount of time that marked females were spending on or near redds appeared unusual. The 1981 observations of marked redds for both chinook and pink salmon confirmed the 1980 observation that females are forced off redds by flow reductions and return to complete their redds if a reasonable opportunity occurs. 6.2.2 Steelhead Redd Depth -Flow Relationships A total of 64 redds were marked in 1982 between April 28 and May 18. Most of the marks were put in areas of high spawning activity. Subsequent field observations in the spring indicated that most of the bricks had remained in place on the redds. Flows at Marblemount during this time ranged from approximately 4700 to 9500 cfs with flows at Hewhalem about 3000 cfs less. Tributary inflow accounteds for the difference. It is apparent that with flows of this order, even relatively low Gorge Powerhouse discharges would not seriously endanger steelbead redds as long as there was substantial tributary inflow below Hewhalem. Adult spawning behavior could be affected, but established redds probably would not be dewatered. However, in late July and early August depending on timing of the end of runoff or when tributary inflow is small. redds may be subject to dewatering prior to fry emergence. Due to the large snowpack and length of the runoff in 1982, steelhead redds were not dewatered before fry emerged. This may not be the case With different runoff patterns and lower tributary inflow. Due to the above average 1982 snowpack. runoff continued until the middle of August resulting in a delay in field observations. By the time marked redds could be observed following the decline in discharge spawning chinook salmon had managed to obliterate most of the marks. River discharge at the Marblemount gage the day redds were measured was about 2320 cfs. The redd - 63 sites hidden by spawning salmon were below the water surface at this discharge and would almost never be subject to dewatering under normal operating conditions. Steelhead redd depth measurements at the time of spawning and on subsequent dates for the Marblemount, Illabot-Corkindale, and upper Rockport areas, respectively, are presented in Appendix IV Tables 1, 2, and 3. 'thirteen marked redds were located of the original 64-marked last spring. Ten marks were in the Marblemount area above the mouth of the Cascade River. Most of these ten redds were within a few hundred feet of each other. River discharge at the Marblemount gage was approximately 8550 cfs (4.2 feet) on May 18 when these redds were marked. On September 30 when these redds were remeasured, discharge was 2320 cfs, and the staff gage was 2.1 feet. Due to the close proximity of the redds to the Marblemount gage, the ten redds near Marblemount were the only ones measured. Water depths over these redds ranged from 2.0 to 4.5 feet when marked on May 18. Thea& redds were most likely made during the period of May 5-18. Mean daily discharge and daily low release at Gorge Powerhouse for M~y 5-18 are summarized in the Table 18. On May 18, hourly discharges at Newhalem from 5 am to 10 am were 5200, 5048, 4953, 5466, 6001, and 6379 cfs. There is at least two hours or more time difference depending on discharge between a change at Newhalem and its arrival at Marblemount (SCL Power Control, pers. comm.). On May 18, Marblemount flow was 8550 cfs at 1 am and 9350 cfs at noon. The lowest flow for the preceding days was 1700 cfs measured at Newhalem. With addition of tributary inflow, it is likely that the redds marked on May 18 were created at flows of at least 4500 cfs. This flow corresponds to a staff reading of 3. 0 feet at Marblemount. On September 30, discharge at Gorge Powerhouse was held virtually constant from before dawn until.noon. This was reflected by a gage reading at 64 Table 18. Mean daily discharge and minimum release at Gorge Powerhouse. Daily Mean Discharges Minimum Date (cfs) Releases (cfs) 5-5 4700 2000 5-6 4500 1700 5-7 4900 1700 5-8 3900 1700 5-9 5200 1700 5-10 4800 1700 5-11 5300 2500 5-12 4900 1900. 5-13 5100 1900 5-14 4600 1700 5-16 4000 1700 5-17 4600 1700 5-18 6300 5000 ,.:-.._ r - 65 Marblemount of 2320 cfs throughout the morning. The marked redds were found from 0.5 feet above the water surface elevation to 1.3 feet beneath it. The change in depth due to reduced now ranged from 2. 2 to 3. 2 feet. The change at the gage was 2.1 feet down from 8550cfs. These differences between the gage and spawning sites are explained by varying cross-sectional areas of the stream channel (i.e., a larger cross sectional area will show a smaller vertical change than the alternative). Gorge discharges that result in nows approaching 2000cfs at Marblemount will jeopardize redds spawned at flows of 4500cfs at Marblemount. Furthermore, it appears that any Gorge discharge which results in a sustained stage of more than one foot less than low flows during spawning, at the Marblemount gage, will probably result in steelhead redd dewatering. Downstream, near Rockport these changes would be less than at the gage due to the moderating influence of tributary inflow from the Cascade River, Illabot Creek and smaller streams. 66 6.3 Instream Incubation Tests 6.3.1 Steelhead Temperature~ Requirement Hatching of steelhead eggs occurred at all three sites between sampling dates of May 15, 1980 and June 1, 1980. The length of time between sampling dates did not permit an accurate estimate of the temperature units (TU) to hatching. All groups appeared to reach emergence condition (button-up) by June 30 and required approximately 1,050 TUs. The unavailability of additional fis~ at later dates precluded incubation studies at the warmer temperature regimes in the Skagit River experienced by the peak ot the natural spawning run ill mid-to late-May. However • the timing of the emergence was determined through electrofishing efforts by WDG. 6.3.-2 Instream ~Fluctuation~ Egg boxes used to test instream flow fluctuation effects on chum salmon were planted in the gravel on January 19, 1980 and removed at biweekly intervals at each of the four redd depths at each site from February 2 to March 28, 1980. The live-to-dead ratios of eggs and alevins in freezer containers for the Thornton Creek and Marblemount Slough sites are presented in Tables 19 and 20, respectively. Similar data for the Whitlock-Vibert boxes at the Thornton Creek site are presented in Table 21. Some mortality was detected as early as two weeks following planting. However, most of the embryos had died in all groups at about the time of hatching, which occurred between February 15 and 29. During the course of the. incubation study at the Thornton Creek site the freezer container incubation boxes appeared to provide l ... l Table 19! Live-to-dead ratios of chum salmon eaas and alevins incubated in freezer containers in the Skagtt•:River at the Thornton Creek study site. Eyed eggs were planted on 1/19/80 and sampled without replacement on indicated dates. Recovery dates 2/02/80 2/15/80 2/29/80 3/14/80 3/28/80 .5' Eggs Alevins Eggs 50/0 50/0 50/0 1/+ 41/4 11/1+ 2/3 5/l .o/6 0/+ 0/+ 0/+ R.edd Depths* l.O' Alevins 0/l+ 0/+ 0/+ Eggs 49/1 10/2 0/17 0/+ 1.5' Alevins 13/+ 0/+ 0/+ Eggs 50/0 6/7+ 0/6+ 0/+ 2.5 1 Alevins 2/2+ 19/0+ . 0/+ * Staff gage hei&hts corresponding to Newhalem gage height of 85.07. + Indistinguishable remains. Table 20. Live-to-dead ratios of chum salmon eggs and alevins incubated in freezer containers in the Skagit River at Marblemount Slough study site. Eyed eggs were planted on 1/19/80 and sampled without replacement on the indicated dates. · Recovery dates 2/02/80 2/15/80 2/29/80 3/14/80 3/28/80 .5 I Eggs Alevins Eggs 50/0 50/0 49/1 8/0+ 0/+ 0/+ 0/+ 0/+ 0/+ 0/13+ O/+ 0/+ 0/+ Redd Depths* 1.0' Alevins 35/0+ 3/+ 0/+ 0/+ Eggs 50/0 50/0 4/0+ 0/6+ 0/+ 1.5' Alevins 3/0+ 0/0+ 0/+ Eggs 49/1 0/0 0/0 0/0+ 0/+ 2.5' Alevins 6/0+ 0/0+ 0/0+ 0/+ * Staff sage heights corresponding to Newhalem gage height of 85.07. + Indistinguishable remains. ' i Table il. . Live-to-dead ratios of chum salmon eggs and alevins incubated in Witlock-Vibert boxes in the Skagit River at the Thornton Creek study site. Byed eggs were planted on 1/19/80 and sampled without replacement on the indicated dates. Bedd Depths* .s t Recovery dates Alevins 1,01 Alevins Eggs 1.5' Alevins Eggs 2.5 1 Alevina 2/02/80 2/15/80 2/29/80 3/14/80 3/28/80 50/0 49/1 49/1 50/0 49/1 50/0 49/1 46/0 1/0+ 19/2 2/+ 1/+ 5/3+ 6/2+ 9/0+ 0/+ 0/+ 0/+ 0/+ 0/17+ 0/+ 0/+ 0/+ 0/+ 0/+ 0/+ 0/+ 0/+ 0/+ * Staff gage heights corresponding to Newhalem gage height of 85.07. + Indistinguishable remains. 4/0 3/2+ 0/+ 0/+ 70 slightly higher percentages of survival at each of the redd depths than the W- V boxes; however, the very low survival rates in each of these tests rendered the experiments unsatisfactory. Thermograph recordings from the shallower redd depths, 0.5, 1.0 and 1.5 ft which may have been indicative of a dewatering event, did not reveal any marked deviations from the temperature pattern at the control depth of 2.5 ft. The high mortality observed in the artificial redds irrespective of redd depth and the lack of substantial flow reductions during the incubation precluded establi~hing any correlations between egg and alevin survival and dewatering events. 6.4 Laboratory Incubation Tests 6.4.1 Environmental Parameters The temperature of the Clark Creek water uaed in the laboratory experiments is plotted with the temperature of the Skagit River at Alma Creek for 198o-81 and 1981-82, in Figs. 17 and 18, respectively. The spring-fed Clark Creek water temperature regime was mare stable than the Skagit River and thus was cooler in the fall and warmer through the winter than the Skagit River. The relative humidity measured inside and outside the laboratory for 19So-81 and 1981-82 is shown in Figs. 19 and 20, respectively. There appears to be na trend where the humidity inside the laboratory was either consistently higher ar lower than outside. Thus the high survival of the dewatered eggs was not confounded by artificially altered humidity inside the laboratory building. The dissolved oxygen levels monitored in the static water experiments of J··· i -u 0 -.;.... w ~ =::. t- c( ~ UJ 0.. ::E w t- >-_. .... <C c z c( 1.1.1 ::E l --~ CLARK CREEK AND SKAGIT RIVER 10~-----------------------------------------------. 8 6 SKAGIT RIVER ~ 2 0+-~--------~~------+-------~~------~--------~--~ NOV 80 DEC 80 JAN 81 fEB 81 ttAR 81 APR 8t Figure 17. Mean daily temperature of Clark Creek water utilized in the experimental hatchery and the Skagit River at Alma C{eek for 1980-81. ...... ..... 10 ,......,. w 0 cc ffi 81! 1--t I-z w u w 6 n::: :::l. I-a: n::: LLI a_ l:: .. w I- >- __J 1--t a: 2· 0 z cc w 1:: 0 CLARK CREEK AND SKAGIT RIVER ' ' ' .. ' ,, ' ' '' ' • ' ' ' • ' I I I f ' II I I I ' " I I • I I ' J • _l l • • I I II I • I II • • I I I .. II • ' -CLARK CREEK I I ~~ I • ' . ' I .. I rl • I I I • • ----SKAGIT RIVER I I I ' '' I. ' • I I II I • 1: II ' ' r I J I I I' ~ OCT 81 NOV 81 DEC 81 JAN 82 fEB 82 NAft 82 APR 82 MAY 82 Figure 18. Mean daily temperature of Clark Creek water used in the experimental hatchery and Skagtt Rive( at Alma Creek for 1981-82. -..1 N J j HUMIDITY 88 ....... l-:z: I.U u 0:: 76 UJ 0.. ........ >- l-...... Co ...... :E ::l 64 :c UJ > ...... l- ..:( ....J 52 I.U 0:: 40 0 Nov 80 Dec 80 Jan 81 Fig. 19. Relative humidity measured inside and outside of the experimental hatchery building for 1980-81. .._, 1..1 LEGEND -e-INSIDE --fr OUTS IDE DRILY MEAN HUMIDITY toO I-• 80 .. z I I w I I u ' I I £k:: I w I I 0... - I I • I I I •• .. 60 I >-I-l I i--t I 0 I I I I 1---i I t ~ \ ....... l:: II .,.. :::> • • I 40 I • w > 1--i inside I-a: outside -------_J w 20 a:::: QL--------L--------L-------~--------~-------4--------~------~--------- OCT 61 NOV 6.1 OEC 81 JAN 82 FEB 82 MAR 82 Af'R 62 MAY 62 Fig. 20. Relative humidity measured inside and outside of the experimental hatchery building for 1981-82. ', .. _ - 75 4, 8 and 15 hrs/day dropped to average lows of 8.4, 5.9 and 4.1 mg/1, respectively, during the natching period. The controls remained at air saturation levela. A particle size analysis of the four artificial substrates tested in the laboratory experimenta in 1980-81 ia presented in Table 22. The minimum particle size for large, medium· and small substrates was greater than 13.5, 6.73 and 3.33 am, respectively. The mixed substrate had a geemetric mean diameter of 1.13 mm. Results of chinook and pink salmon redda sampled in the Skagit River are shown in Table 23. The analyses for both species were averaged to arrive at a substrate composition that was used for these species as well as chum salmon and steelhead trout during the 1981-82 laboratory studies (Table 23). 6.4.2 Dewatering ~ 6.4.2.1 Fertilization to Eyed Stage (1980-81) The comparative survival of eggs from chinook and coho salmon and steelhead trout dewatered for 0 (control) ~. a. and 16 hrs daily in the large, medium small or mixed gravel sizes was evaluated from fertilization through eyed stage (a weeks for chinook and coho salmon and 6 week3 for steelhead). Eggs of all species during the development period were highly tolerant to dewatering irrespective of daily dewatering time or substrate type used. Survival in control redds was similar to dewatered redds for each gravel size tested with levels of survival ranging from 65-90S, 85-95S, and 90-100S for chinook and coho salmon and steelhead trout, respectively (See Appendix V, Figs. 1, 2, 3, ~. 5. 6, 1, a, 9. 10, 11). An exception to the chinook survival ranges was the daily dewatering of 4 hr in small gravel which declined to 40 percent due to flow reduction resulting from the cylinder clogging. Moreover the generally lower survival with chinook salmon as Table 22. Geometric mean diameter (dg) and substrate particle size by groups representing percent volume passing through sieves of the designated size (mm) for artificial substrates used in 1980-81. Artificial Sieve size (mm) redd Sample dg substrates size (mm) 50.8 26.7 13.5 6.73 3.33 1.68 .833 .419 .211 .106 Large 11' -'lc o.o .469 .463 .004 .002 0 0 0 0 0 Medium 13 o.o o.o .403 .563 .023 .007 .002 .001 o.o .001 Small 10 o.o 0.0 .001 .469 .519 .013 .005 .002 0.0 .001 _,. (]l . Mixed 58 7. 73 o.o .254 .393 • 196 .057 .039 .030 .018 .01 .003 * Indeterminable c,l .. 1 "' l Table 23. Chinook and pink salmon spawning. substrate analyses for 1981-82. Geometric mean diameters (dg) and substrate particle size by groups representing percent volume retained on sieves of the designated size (mm) are shown. Artificial substrate particle size distribution is also presented. Redd Sample dg Sieve size {DIIll} substrate size (mm) 50.8 26.7 13.5 6.73 3.33 1.68 0.833 0.419 0.211 0.106 Chinook 8 31.0 0.544 o.uo 0.121 0.079 0.046 0.035 0.032 0.021 0.009 0.003 Pink 9 32.2 0.572 0.133 0.099 0.059 0.049 0.027 0.018 0.025 0.015 0.002 Artificial* 31.6 0.551 0.122 o.uo 0.069 0.048 0.031 0.025 0.023 0.012 0.003 *Mean of chinook and pink salmon analyses. --A --A 78 compared to coho and steelhead was caused by factors other than dewatering since control redds declined at a similar rate to dewatered redds with this species. Coho salmon eggs were not evaluated in mixed gravel for dewatering times of 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day for the fertilization to eyed staged. However, equivalent data are available from tests evaluating the incubation period from fertilization through hatching (Section 6.4.2.3). · Survival levels o~ coho salmon eggs dewatered continuously (24 hr/day) from fertilization through eyed stage (approx. 8 weeks) were 80J for large, medium and small gravel substrates and SOJ for the mixed substrate (Appendix V, Fig. 12). Control levels for each o~ the gravel substrates were approximately 90J. This test was not completed for chinook salmon or steelhead trout; however, equivalent data is available from tests evaluating the period from fertilization through hatching (Section 6.4.2.3). 6.4.2.2 Eyed through Hatching Survival of chinook, coho and chum salmon and steelhead trout was determined for dewatering regimes 0~ 0 (control), 4, a, 16 and 24 hr/day (continuous) in large, medium and small gravel for the incubation period extending from eyed through hatching. Survival decreased in most tests from the commencement o~ hatching at a rate directly related to the amount of time dewatered (Appendix V, Figs. 13, 1~. 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32. 33. 3~. 35, 36, 37. 38). Exceptions to this progressive decrease in survival were found in large gravel in which alevins in some instances moved downward through the gravel and survived in the water retained at the bottom o~ the cylinder. The use o~ repetitive sampling without replacement produced fluctuating survival levels between redds. The survival through hatching was summarized by noting the incubation day on which 50 percent mortality occurred for each dewatering regime and gravel size and - 79 is presented in Tables 24, 25 and 26 for chinook, coho and ste.elhead, respectively. Chinook eggs dewatered 4 hrs/day in small gravel reached the SOS mortality level (day 65) prior to the onset of hatching (day 72) due to a decline in flow brought on by clogging and was not due to dewatering. The chum salmon eggs were obtained as a single lot consisting of mixed fertilization dates, consequently, hatching time was staggered which precluded construction of a time to 50S mortality table. However, the pattern of decreased survival observed with the other species was also evident with chum salmon but in an· extended form. 6.4.2.3 Fertilization ThrOUgh Hatching In the first year studies, chinook salmon were dewatered for 0 (control), 4, a. 16, and 24 hr/day (continuous) in large, medium, small and mixed gravel for the incubation period extending from fertilization through hatching (Appendix v. Figs. 39, 40). Coho salmon eggs and alevins were dewatered in mixed gravel for 0, 4, a and 16 hrs/day (Appendix Fig. 41) and steelhead trout eggs and alevin:s were dewatered in large, medium, small and mixed gravel for 0 (control) and 24 hr/day (continuous) for this period (Appendix V, Fig. 42). The same pattern of survival was evident in this longer term testing as was present when this period was divided into fertilization to eyed and eyed through hatching, (i.e., high survival up to the onset of hatching followed by a significant·poat-hatching decrease in survival directly related to the length of daily dewatering). In the second year studies, chinook, pink and chum salmon and steelhead trout were dewatered for 0 (control), 2, 4, a. 16 and 24 hr/day (continuously) in one artificial gravel mixture that approximated natural spawning substrate in the Skagit River. The results for chinook, pink, chum and steelhe~d confirmed those obtained the first year and are presented in Figs. 21, 22, 23, 80 CHINOOK DEWATERED Control 4 hr/day 8 hr/day 16 hr/day Small -65 76 76 (0. 33 -1.35 em) MediUII DQ -79 76 75 5 (0.67 -2.67 em) ti = t:l Mixed 78 77 77 - (0. 08 -5.08 ca) Large -78 76 73 (1.35 -5.08 em) Table 24 • Incubation days to SO percent mortal.ity for chinook salmon tested under four dewatering regimes and gravel sizes. - ·- l ~ ~ Ill N 1-1 co ...a Ill _, 5 I c.:l - Small (0. 33 -J.3S em) Mediua (0.67 -2.67 em) MUed (0.08 -s.oa ca) tarse (1.3.5-s.oa em) Control - - I - I - 81 COHO DPMATERED 4 hr/day 8 hr/day t6 hr/day -75 71 -72' 70 73 70 70 --- Table 25. Incubation days to 50 percent: mortality for coho salmon tested under four dewatering regimes and gravel sizes. -. -- 82 STEEI.HEAD DEWA!ERED Control 4 hr/day 8 hr/day 16 hr/day Small -55 53 53 (0.33 -r .35 em) Medium ~ -56 54 53 5 (0.67 -2.67 em) ;i = ~ Mixed -54 53 53 (0.08 -5.08 ca) Large -58 54 53 (1.35 -5.08 em) Table 26. Incubation days t:o 50 percent mortality for st:eelhead trout tested under four dewatering regimes and gravel sizes. _J a: > t-t > ~ ::::l (/] l-z w u £t: w Q... .. l l ·: l CHINOOK SALMON -OEWATERED 100~--------------------~-------------------------------------, 80 LEGEND -&-CONTROL 40 -5-2 HR -+-4 HR -¥-8 HR 20 -o-16 HR --.A.-24 HR o+-~~-r--4-~~-+--4---~-4---+---+-~--~--;-~~~~~--r--; 300 400 500 600 700 BOO 900 1000 1100 TEMPERATURE UNITS Fig. 21. Percent survival of chinook salmon embryos dewatered for 2, 4, 8, 16, and 24 bra/day in artificial redds from fertilization through hatching. 1200 00 (!,) _J a: > ....... > 0::: ::l (/) 1-z w u 0::: w 0.... PINK SALMON -OEWATERED 80 60 lEGEtfJ -&-CONTROL 40 -1!1-2 tift -t-4 tfl "*8 HR 20 -+-16 HR ...,._24 HR o+-----~-----+----~r-----~----4------r-----1------~~--~-----+--J 300 500 700 900 1100 1300 TEMPERATURE UNITS Fig. 22. Percent survival of pink salmon embryos dewatered for 2, 4, 8, 16, and 24 hrs/ day in artificial redds from fertilization through hatching. 00 p. _. a: > ......... > 0::: => (/) t--z w u 0:: w n.. CHUM SALMON -DEWRTEREO 100~----------------------------~-----------------------------. 60 LEGEND -e-CONTROL 40 -e-2 HR -+-4 HR -M-8 HR 20 -+-16 HR --.6.-24 tiR 0+-~~-+--~--+-~~-+--~--+-~~-+--~--+-~~-+--~~~-,~~--~~ 250 350 450 550 650 750 650 950 1050 ll50 1250 TEMPERATURE UNITS Fig. 23. Percent survival of chum salmon embryos dewatered for 2 1 4, 8, 16, and 24 hrs/day in artificial redds from fertilization through hatching. 00 ln _J a: > ........ > 0:::: :::J (/) I-z w u 0:: w Q._ STEELHEAO TROUT -OEWATEREO 80 60 LEGEtfl -e-CONTROL 40 -e-2 tfl -+-4 HR ""*" 8 HR .....--16 tfl 20 ...._.24 HR 0+-------~-----4~-----4-------+------~------~----~~~~~~----~ 300 400 500 600 700 TEMPERATURE UNITS Fig. 24. Percent survival of steelhead trout embryos dewatered for 2, 4. 8, 16, and 24 hrs/day in artificial redds from fertilization through hatching. ()0 ()\ - - - - 87 2q, respectively. Reduction in extraneous sources of mortality and acquisition of reliable temperature monitoring equipment permitted a more detailed analysis of post-hatching survival. The time in incubation days and temperature units required to reach 50S hatching and the 75, 50, and 25S survival marks were estimated for each species and are summarized in Table 27. As evident from these data, the dewatering time of 24 hrs/day, (i.e., continuously dewatered from the time of fertilization) resulted in a mortality of at least 50S of the eggs prior to 50S hatching for all species. Fungus played a major role in this mortality making it difficult to quantitate the effects of dewatering alone. 6.~.3 Static ~ ~ 6.4.3.1 Fertilization Through Eyed Stage The comparative survival or coho salmDn and steelhead trout eggs was evaluated. in the static water condition for daily periods of 0 (control) ~. 8, 16 hrs in large, medium, small and llli:z:ed gravel sizes. Survival for both species was high (8Q-90S) tor all static regimes and gravel substrates tested although slightly less than control levels (90-95S) (Appendi:z: V, Figs. q3, 44, 45, 46, ~7. 48, 49, 50). The data presented in the steelhead figures extends beyond the eyed stage and approaches hatching at which time survival decreased significantly, particularly in the 8 and 16 hr/day static conditions for all gravel sizes. The dramatic decrease in survival for steelhead on day 47 for the 8 hr test was caused by accidently providing 2q hrs of static conditions rather than 8 hrs. 6.4.3.2 Eyed Through Hatching The comparative survival of chinook, coho and chum salmon and steelhead trout was evaluated in static water conditions for daily periods of 0 Table 27. Temperature units (incubation days in parentheses) to 50% hatching and 75, 50, and 25% survival for chinook, chum, and pink salmon and steelhead tro~~ embryos dewat~red 0 (control), 2, 4, 8, 16, and 24 (continuous) hrs/day ·.in 1981-82. Dewaterins time 1 hrsldax Species Control 2 4 8 16 24 50% Hatch 1002-(70) 978(69) 979(69) 984 (69) 973(69) r 992 (70) 979(69) 970(68) 973(69) 925(65) Chinook % Survival 50 1058(75) 993(70) 984(69) 986(70) 925(65) 25 1058(75) 1019(72) 998(70) 986(70) 966(68) 50% Hatch 967(78) 920(78) 963(78) 966(78) 946(78) r 932(79) 963(78) 966(78) 946(78) 547(46) Chum % Survival 50 969(82) 975(79) 978(79) 958(79) 809(68) 25 1030(87) 1012(82) 990(80) 958(79) 897(-75) 00 00 50% Hatch 1082·(76) 1071(76) 1071 (76) 1077 (76) 1063(76) r 1136 (81) 1085 (77) 1091 (77) 1050(75) 1005(71) Pink % Survival 50 U36·(81) 1137(81) 1104 (78) 1076(77) 1005(71) 25 1186(85) 1137(81) 1118(79) 1089(78) 1081(77) 50% Hatch 625(49) 636(50) 636(50) 624 (49) 618(49) rs 636(50) 636(50) 624(49) 605(48) 561(44) Steel head % Survival 50 674(53) 636 (50) 641(50) 605(48) 561(1t8) 25 686(54) 674(53) 641(50) 618(49) 561(48) - ·- 89 (control) ~. 8, '16 and 2~ hrs (continous) in large, medium, small and mixed gravel sizes. Due to an insufficient number of chum eggs static conditions were limited to a (control), 8, 16 hrs/day fer all gravel sizes. Survival of chinook eggs in small, medium and large gravel was poor prior to static water testing for reasons unknewn, however, general survival trends were discernable · after initiation of the test regimes. Distinct differences in survival were noted among the various gravel sizes aDd static water times tested for all the species. The general pattern that emerged consisted of progressively lower post-hatching survival as gravel size decreased, (i.e., large:>medium.>mixed >SIIIall) and time of static conditions increased (Appendix V, Figs. 51, 52, 53, 5~. 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 6~, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 11, 72). The effect of gravel size was most evident in the large gravel where survival was significantly higher for all static water conditions wben campared to the other gravel sizes tested. Survival levels in the static water time of 4 hr/day were similar to or slightly lower than controls for all s~ecies aDd gravel sizes while static. water times of 8, 16, and 24 hr/day were substantially lower. Unlike the dewatering studies, survival often did not reach 0~ within the time constraints of the testing. 6.4.3.3 Hatching Througft Emergence The results of preliminary tests designed to determine the tolerance of developing alevins to single event dewaterings of various times are presented in Table 28, for chinook, pink, chum, and coho salmon and steelhead trout, respectively. As evident from the pink and steelhead data, tolerance to dewatering decreased significantly as development proceeded. Table 28. Percent mortality resulting from single event dewaterings of chinook, pink, chum, and coho salmon and steelhead trout alevins for indicated times in 1981-82. Temperature units (TUs) required for hatching and emergence and number accumulated at the time of testing are presented. Dewaterin& time {hr~ TUs (F•) Species Hatching Emergence Test 0.5 1 2 4 6 8 16 24 Chinook 1002 1719 1162 30 1175 46 1263 70 1345 69 72 74 1419 78 78 81 1719 100 100 100 1.0 Pink:• 1082 1777 1188 12 28 0 1263 46 1345 10 32 61 1419 24 57 64 1719 84 98 93 1777 82 87 93 Chum 967 1561 1183 1322 71 91 94 98 98 1450 100 100 100 100 Coho 777 1334 1044 83 96 1183 93 95 100 1334 100 100 100 100 Steelhead 625 1050 701 59 97 96 727 32 64 79 782 60 87 92 887 99 1; 91 6.4.4 Alevin Quality Mean lengths. weighta and condition factors of chinook salmon alevins exposed to 0, 4, 8, 16 and 24 hrs of dewatering per day as eggs in 4 gravel types in 1980-81 are shown in Tables 29, 30 and 31. As apparent from the tables no differences in the meaaured indices were discernable among the various combinations o~ time dewatered and gravel type. Similar lack of differences was observed with coho dewatering tests (Tables 32-34). The mixed fertilization times within tested groups of chum salmon did not allow for a standardized sampling time of alevins at button-up to determine fry quality. A water tlow interruption to the Heath incubator resulted in the loss of the steelhead alevin.s which were to be examined tor try quality. In second year atudies (1981-82), the development of alevins was evaluated immediately after hatching to eliminate any influence compensatory mechanisms may have had following testing and prior to calculation of . condition factors at the button-up stage. The body and yolk weights at hatching expressed as a pro~rtion o-r the yolk weight at the time of spawning tor chinook, pink, and chum salmon and steelhead trout are presented in Tables 35, 36, 37 and 38. respectively. The estimated energy ~E) or metabolism, is also shown. The negati v~ values tor fl E result from the aum of the body and yolks totaling greater than 1.0. This result is puzzling but may be accounted tor by inaccuracy in weighing. drying, or loss of initial yolk material. Although not statistically :significant, the body to initial yolk weight ratio in the continuoualy dewatered test was less than controls and other dewatering times for all species evaluated. No other trends were apparent. 6.5 Intrasravel Alevin Survival. Movement and Behavior 6.5.1 Intragravel Behavior Studies in 1981 Table 29, Mean and range of lengths for chinook salmon alevins dewatered o. 4. a. 16, and 24 hrs/day as eggs in four gravel sizes in 1980-81. ' Incubation Hra dewatered/day Gravel size days (em) dewatered 0 4 8 16 24 Small 38.9 38.7 39.0 38.6 38.6 (0. 33-1. 35) 56-75 (36. 5-41.0) (36.5-40.0) (36. 7-41. 0) (36. 5-41. 0) (36.5-40.5) n•25 n•l6 n=27 n=24. n=lO Medium 38.5 38.8 39.3 38.7 38.5 (0.67-2.67) 5~-75 (37.0-40.5) (36.0-41.0) (36.7-42.0) (37. 0-41. 0) (35. 5-41. 0) n•24 n=l7 n-23 n=i7 n=lO Large 38.7 39.0 39.5 39.3 38.8 (1. 35-5. 08) 56-75 (36.0-40.0) (37 .0-41.5) (37. 0-41. 5) (36.5-42.0) (36. 7-40.5) n"'24 n=20 n=20 n=JO n=7 \0 N Mixed 39.7 39.3 39.3 39.1 (0.08-5.08) 58-77 (36.5-42.0) (36.5-40.5) (38.D-41.0) (37.0-41.0) n=30 n"'l3 n""8 n=21 Mixed 38.9 38.1 38.8 38.2 (0.08-5,08) 1-54 (37. 0-41. 0) (35.5-40.5) (36. 7-41. 0) (35. 0-41. 0) n""l9 n=20 n=21 n""27 Mixed 38.9 39.3 38.4 39.1 (0.08-5.08) 1-75 (36. 0-41. 0) (36.5-40.5) (35,5-40.0) (38. 0-41. 0) n=23 n ... 21 n=25 n=l8 J } Table 30. Mean and range of weights for chinook salmon alevins dewatered 0, 4, 8, 16, and 24 hrs/day as eggs in four gravel sizes in 1980-81. Incubation Hrs dewateredfday Gravel size days (em) dewatered 0 4 8 16 24 Small 47.9 48,6 48.4 47.9 46.7 (0. 33-1. 35) 56-75 (38-56) (40-55) (37-55) (41-55) (39-54) n•25 n""16 n•27 n•24 n•10 Medium 47.3 47.9 48.4 46.3 46.3 (0.67-2.67) 56-75 (38-54) (38-54) (37-55) (39-53) (35-52) n•24 n•l7 n""23 n•27 n•10 Large 48.8 50.0 50.2 46.1 48.3 (1.35-5.08) 56-75 (4Q-56) (43-56) (41-57) (35-54) (37-54) n""24 n•20 n .. 20 n .. 3o n•7 .;p l...l Mixed 50.1 50.9 50.2 i48.3 (0.08-5,08) 58-77 (40-59) (42-56) (39-55) (40-55) n•30 n•ll n•8 n .. 21 Mixed 47.1 45,6 45.2 46.9 (0.08-5.08) 1-54 (42-56) (39-53) (40-54) (38-56) n•l9 n""20 n""21 n=27 Mixed 48.4 50.6 45.2 46.1 (0.08-5.08) 1-75 (40-58) (43-58) (38-53) (42-54) n"'23 n .. 21 n•25 n•18 Table 31. Mean and range of condition factors for chinook salmon alevins dewatered 0, 4, 8, 16. and 24 hrs, and gravel sizes in 1980-81. Incubation Hrs dewatered/day Gravel size days (em) dewatered 0 4 8 16 24 Small 81.3 83.5 81.3 83.); 81.1 (0. 33-1. 35) 56-75 (72.5-95.1) (76.0-91.1) (71.3-94.5) (76.0-99.4) (72. 5-95. 7) n ... 25 n=l6 n=27 n"'24 n=10 Medium 83.1 82.2 79.7 77.1 82.7 (0.67-2.67) 56-75 (72.9-91.6) (72.5-95.1) (70.8-93.3) (62.5-92.0) (75.4-88.4) n=24 D""l7 n=23 n=27 n=lO Large 84.0 84.5 81.1 77.1 82.7 (1. 35-5.08) 56-75 (68.2-94.5) (72.8-98.6) (74.2-91.6) (62.5-92.0) ·(75.4-88.4) n•24 n""20 n=20 n""30 n=7 '-D p. Mixed 80.0 84.0 82.4 80.4 (0.08-5.08) 58-77 (72.7-88.9) (77.6-97.8) (72. 5-92.1) (75. 7-86.3) n=30 n,•ll n=8 n=21 Mixed 79.7 82.6 77.3 84.1 (0.08-5.08) 1-54 (71.4-89.8) (72.9-93.8) (69.9-86.5) (74.0-105.3) D""'l9 na20 n=21 n""'27 Mixed 82.0 83.0 79.9 77.2 (0.08-5.08) 1-75 (74.4-88.1) (71.4-95. 7) (68.5-86.5) (72.9-83.3) n=23 n"'21 n=25 n=l8 l · .. _ _.) l -__ ] .. } ,, Table 3:L Mean an4 range of lengths for coho salmon alevins dewatered o. 4. s. 16. and 24 bra/day as eggs in four gravel sizes in 1980-81. Incubation Hrs dewatered/day Gravel size days (em) dewatered 0 4 8 16 24 Small 32.0 32.4 (0.33-1.35) 1-56 (29.0-34.5) (29.0-35.0) n•32 n=27 Medium 32.6 32.3 (0.67-2.67) 1-56 (29.0-35.5) (29.0-34.5) n•32 n•32 Large 32.9 (1. 35-5.08) 1-56 (30.5-34.5) n=31 \0 U1 Mixed 32.9 32.6 (0.08-5.08) 1-56 (29.0-35.5) (29.5-35.0) n101 63 n=51 Mixed 32.7 32.8 32.4 32.1 (0.08-5.08) 1-67 (29.5-34. 5) (30.0-35.5) (29.0-35.0) (29.0-34.5) n ... 31 n .. 31 n•32 n=32 Table 33. Mean and range of weights for coho salmon alevina dewatered o. 4, 8, 16, and 24 hrs/day as eggs in four gravel sizes in 1980-81. Incubation ' Gravel size days Hra dewatered[dai (em) dewatered 0 4 8 16 24 Small 23.0 26.6 (0. 33-1. 35) 1-56 (16-31) (20-23) n•32 n•27 Medium 26.1 25.4 (0.67-2.67) 1-56 (18-32) (15-33) n .. 32 0 100 32 Large 27.2 (1. 35-5. 08) 1-56 (21-34) nm31 \£) "' Mixed 25.9 26.2 (0.08-5.08) 1-56 (29-36) (20-32) n=63 n=51 Mixed 26.4 24.4 2.5.9 23.2 (0.08-5.08) 1-67 (20-33) (30-36) (20-30) (15-29) D"'Jl n•31 n-32 n=32 -l __ _j ___ ] --J ---J J J Table 34. Mean and range of condition factors for coho salmon alevins dewatered o.·4, a. 16. and 24 hrs/day as eggs in four gravel sizes in 1980-81. Incubation Hrs dewatered/day Gravel size days (em) dewatered 0 4 8 16 24 Small 69.5 78.2 (0. 33-1. 35) 1-56 (58.3-77 .7) (68.0-97.9) n•l2 n""27 Medium 75.5 74.5 (0.67-2.67) 1-56 (64.4-102.9) (58.8-87.5) n"'32 n'"'32 Large 76.3 (1.35-5.08) 1-56 (64.8-87.3) n-31 \0 -a Mixed 72.8 77.0 (0.08-5.08) 1-56. (59.4-91.9) (66.3-90.6) o•63 0""51 Mixed 75.3 68.5 76.3 69.5 (0.08-5.08) 1-67 (68.8-85.7) (59.3-78.9) (58.9-89.0) (56. 0-77. 7) o•ll 0""31 P""32 n""32 98 Table 35. Mean body (bl) and yolk-sac Cy 1 ) weights, body weight to initial yolk weight ratio ~ , yolk-sac to initial yolk Control 2 4 8 16 24 Table 36. Control 2 4 8 16 24 y Yo weight ratio _! , and energy of metabolism (~E) for Yo chinook salmon dewatered for 0 (control), 2, 4, 8, 16 and 24 (continuous) hrs/day from fertilization to hatching. N 39 .0091 .0898 75 .0077 .0872 100 .0080 .0925 103 .0071 .0787 78 .0081 .0833 25 .0062 .0819 .105 .089 .093 .082 .094 .072 1.041 1.011 1.072 .913 .965 .949 -.145 -.100 -.165 .005 -.059 -.021 Mean body (bl) and yolk-sac (y1 ) weights, body weight to initial yolk wei.ght r~tio b1 , yolk-sac to initial yolk y Yo weight ratio 1 , and energy of metabolism (liE) for pink y;:; salmon dewaeerea for 0 (control), 2, 4, 8, 16 and 24 (continuous.) hrs/day from fertilization to hatching. bl Yl N bl (g) Yl (g) Yo Yo ~E 44 .0067 .0590 .103 .907 -.010 25 .0053 .0537 .097 .826 .079 25 .0075 .0570 .115 .876 .009 12 .0052 .0516 .082 .794 .• 124 23 .0069 .0522 .106 .803 .092 43 .0047 .0571 .072 .878 .050 ~$ 99 Table 37~ Mean body (b 1 ) and yolk-sac (y1 ) weights~ body weight to initial yolk weight ratio b1 , yolk-sac to initial yolk y Yo weight ratio ....l ~ and energy of metabolism (~E) for chum Yo salmon dewatered for 0 (control, 2~ 4~ a, 16 and 24 (continuous) hrs/ day from fertilization to hatching. b1 Y1 N b1 (g) y1 (g) Y.o Yo ~ - ·1· Control 78 .0077 .0913 .079 .931 -.010 -2 75 .0074 .0933 .• 075 .951 -.026 4 75 .0073 .0913 .074 .931 -.005 8 109 .0070 .0867 .07l .884 .045 16 32 .0072 .0903 .073 .921 .007 !"""' 24 25 .0061 .0938 .062 .956 .018 Tabla 38. Mean body (b~) and yolk-sac (y1 ) wei.ghts, body weight to 1nit:f.al yolk weight rat:f.o ~ , yolk-sac to initial yolk ·~ weight rat:f.o ~ , and euu~ of metabolism (A.E) for steelhead trout dewatered for 0 (concrol), 2, 4, a, 16 and 24 (continuous) hrs/day from fert~ation to hatching. b~ Yl N bl (g) y1 (g) Y; Yo ~E Control 36 .0044 .0326 .108 .815 .077 2 44 .0048 .. 0352 .119 .869 .012 4 80 .0050 .0317 .123 • 782 .095 8 106 .0036 .0321. .089 .792 .119 16 64 .0032 .0332 .080 .820 .100 24 100 Data collected in 1981 on intragravel movement of chinook alevins indicated that early stage post-hatching alevins could make successful downward movements in the large gravel (Fig. 25) but not in the three smaller gravel sizes, as illustrated in Fig~ 26 for mixed gravel. The survival of chinook in large gravel due to movement during the hatching period was variable tram one sampling date to another but did not decrease as hatching progressed (Fig. 25). One hundred percent of the alevina successfully moved downward and survived in one cylinder dewatered for 16 hr/day and sampled near the end ot the hatching period. Chinook alevins were not observed on the bottom in any of the other three gravel sizes tested. 'nle mixed gravel was selected to represent the three smaller gravels (small. medium and mixed). Survival of the controls in mixed gravel remained near 100 percent while survival in the 4, 8 and 16 hr/day dewatered testa decreased with time dewatered (Fig. 26). This was attributed to the inability of chinook alevins to move through smaller gravel sizes. In studies on later-stage, pre-emergent chinook alevins it was determined that 100 percent of the alevins could make rapid downward migrations through the large gravel to avoid dewatering. No successful migrations were recorded in any ot the three 3m8ller gravel sizes. The post-hatching survival of coho alevins remained high under all dewatered regimes tested in the large gravel (Fig. 27). Survival decreased in the small, medium and mixed gravel with increased time dewatered (Fig. 28, 29 and 30). The decrease in survival in the smaller gravels was directly related to amount of time the alevins had been dewatered. There was no post-hatching survival in the three smaller-sized gravels dewatered for 16 hr/day and 8 hr/day in the mixed gravel. 101 CHINOOK SALMON -OEWATEREO -LARGE GRAVEL -100 ._J ""'" a: 80 > > t a::: =:J ""i <IJ z > LLJ ._J -a: 40 1-~ ~~ z ~CONTROL LLJ c..J -· 0:: -+ .. I« 20 I.&J ~8 fft 0- "* 16 HR 0 72 74 76 78 80 INCUBATION DRY Fig. 25. Percent survi.va.l of chinook salmon alevins dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in large gravel through the hatching period. CHINOOK SALMON -DEWATEREO -MIXED GRAVEL 100 ._J a:: ao > > a::: :;:::) <n z 60 -> I.&J ._J a:: 40 ~ 1-z ~C~TROI. LLJ """' w --&> 4 l"ft 0:: 2tl t..J ~B toft 0- ""'" "* 16 HR 0 72 74 76 78 eo INCUBATION DAY Fig. 26. Percent survival of chinook salmon alevins dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in mixed gravel tilrough tb.e hatching period. ...J c: > > 0:::: :::l tJ:) z > I.U ~ 1-z I.U (...) 0:: I.U 0... 102 COHO SALMON -OEWATERED -LARGE GRAVEL eo 60 20 0~--~----~----+---~----~----+---~----~ 55 69 73 i7 81 Fig. 27. 100 ...J c: 80 > -> Q: :::l en z 60 -> UJ ...J c: ~ 1-z UJ (...) 0:: 2D I.U 0... a Fig. 28· INCUSATI ON DAY Percent survival of coho salmon alevins dewatered for 4 8 and 16 hrs/day in large gravel through the hatching period.~ COHO SALMON -OEWATERED -MEDIUM GRAVEL ~ ~COOROL ~Hfi ~81fi ~ 16 HR 55 69 73 i7 81 INCUBATION DAY Percent survival of coho salmon alevins dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in medium gravel through the hatching period. 103 COHO SALMON -DEWATERED -SMALL GRAVEL !00 ....I a: eo > g > ,_. a::: ~ tf.) :z 6Q ~-> '-'-1 ....I a: 40 ~. 1-~ :z -+-C()fTROI. .... '-'-1 u ~ 4 lfi a::: 20 '-'-1 ~EIIfi ~ ~ ~ 16 Hft 0 55 59 73 77 81 INCUBATION DAY Fig. 29 .• Percent survival of coho salmon alevins dewatered for 4, 8 and """'" ~6 hrs/day in small grave~ through the hatching period. COHO SALMON -OE~ATERED -MIXED GRAVEL 100 ""'1 ~ .....J a:· eo -+-CONTROL > > ~ .. toft a:: -+e lfi =:l (,(.) :z 60 "*"' 16 HR > u.J .....J a: 40 1-:z u.J (,.j a::: 20 u.J -~ D 6S 69 73 n Ell INCUBATION DRY Fig. 30. Percent survival of coho salmon alevins dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in mixed gravel through the hatching period. 104 Survival of coho through the hatching stage in large gravel (1.35-5.08 em) is shown graphically in Fig. 27. Length of dewatered period apparently influenced the ability of alevins to migrate. The survival decreased with an increase in the dewatered period. High survival well into the alevin stage indicates that successive daily dewatering of up to 16 hr/day did not increase mortality after the alevina had migrated to the bottom of the cylinder. Some coho alevins migrated through the small, medium and mixed gravel sizes. The overall number of successful migrations through these smaller sized gravels was lower than in the large gravel. Post-hatching survival of coho in the mixed gravel remained high in the control but declined to zero in the 16 hr/day test before the end of the hatching period (Fig. 30). Survival in the ~ and 8 hr/day tests dropped during hatching in proportion to the length of time dewatered. In studies of later stage pre-emergent coho alevins it was round that the alevins could make rapid migrations through 30 em of large gravel in one minute. Alevins were also observed to make non-successful migrations of shorter distances through the three smaller gravel sizes. Thus downward movement occurred but was not rapid enough to keep up with a dewatering rate of 30 em/min so the alevins never reached the 5 em of water retained at the bottom of the cylinder. The post-hatching tests of steelhead alevins (Figs. 31, 32. 33 and 34) indicated survival occurred in alevins dewatered for ~ hrs/day in large (Fig. 31), medium (Fig. 32), and small (Fig. 33) gravel. Those exposed 8 hrs/day survived only in the large gravel (Fig. 31). The 16 hr/day exposure resulted in complete mortality in all gravel sizes except about 3 percent survival remained in the large gravel (Fig. 31). Control survival in all four gravel sizes remained near 100 percent throughout these tests. The time to complete mortality in the medium, small and mixed gravels occurred on incubation day 56 "'"" lOS STEELHEAD TROUT -OEWATEREO -LARGE GRAVEL 100 cE so > -> 0::: :::::l en """' 60 z -> Li.J ..J f""" a: •a ~ l-z -+-COCTROL l! Li.J w ..... I« -0:: 20 ~a l'ft Li.J ~ ~16 HR 0 48 52 56 60 64 INCUBATION DAY -Fig. 31. Percent survival of steelhead trout alevins dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in large gravel through the hatching period. ,_, STEELHEAO TROUT -DEWATERED -NEOIUM GRAVEL lCO -1 a: eo > I~ -> 0:: :::::l en -z > Li.J ..J a: 40 ~ -~ z -+-CIJITRQL Li.J u -&-4 tft 0:: 20 !~! ~ ~8 I« Q.. +ts HR a ~~ 48 52 56 60 64 INCUBATION DAY Fig. 32. Percent survival of steelhead trout alevins dewatered for.4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in medium grave1 through the hatching period. 100 .....J a: eo > > c:: :::1 (J7) z 60 > ~ .....J c: 40 1-z L.I.J u 0::: 20 ~ a.. 0 Fig. 33. _J c: so > -> c:: :::1 (J7) z -> LU _J c: so 20 106 STEELHERD TROUT -OEWRTEREO -SMALL GRAVEL ~ -+-CONTROL ~.CI"ft -&-e l"ft ~ 16 HR 48 52 56 50 54 INCUBATION DAY Percent survival of steelhead trout alevins dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in small gravel through the hatching period. o~.-s~~~----~s2----~:2B=~~P-~~~e--+s-o--~.---~s.c INCUBATION DRY Fig. 34. Percent survival of steelhead trout alevins dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in mixed gravel through the hatching period. - - 107 while 3 percent survived after 52 days in large gravel. In aquarium tests it was determined that alevins could make increasingly rapid downward migrations as their development progressed (Table 39). Even very low dewatering rates of from .5 to 5 inches per hour caused mortalities of over 50 percent durin& the· first several weeks after hatching. As the alevtns approached the 90 percent button-up stage dewatering rates of up to 48 inches per hour caused less than 30 percent mortality. 6o5.2. Intragravel Behavior Studies in 1982 The 1982 alevin behavior studies were done on campus. The temperature of the Lake Washington water used is plotted in Figure 35. The dissolved oxygen level ~of the incubation water was monitored on a regular basis. The level of oxygen in the incoming water did not drop below 9.2 mgll at any time during the laboratory studies. The dissolved oxygen levels during the steelhead incubation period (May-June) were lower than those reported in coho and ch1.111 studies (March-April) due to increasing lake water temperature. These lower dissolved oxygen levels were always at least 2 mg/l above the reported critical level of 1.1 mg/l (Alderdice et al •• 1958). 6.5.3 Aquaria Behavior Studies Observation of early post-hatchins alevins indicated that there was a general tendency for both chinook and pink alevins to move downward through the gravel substrate. The distance moved varied from several inches to 15 inches in the first several days after hatching. Movement of individual alevins was impossible to follow as they were often behind the gravel substrate. Other studies on chinook and pink alevins indicated that the ability to make intragravel movements to avoid dewatering increased in direct relation to the developmental stages of the alevin. The average percent mortality and 108 Table 39. Percent mortality of steelhead alevins at various dewatering rates. Dewatering rate Date % button-up (inches /b.r) % mortality June l5 0 (hatch) June 24 30-40 .5 52 June 30 40-50 5 58 July 7 60-70 2 0 July 8 60-70 3 16 July 8 60-70 6 38 July 14 80-90 12 12 July 14 80-90 12 26 July l5 80-90 24 20 July l5 80-90 48 28 July 21 90-100 24 10 July 21 9Q-100 48 30 July 22 90-100 12 12 j 24 22 20 18 16 u 11 0 z 12 0.. 10 ~ w 1-8 6 4 2 0 FEB MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE TIME IN DAYS Fig. 35. Temperature of Lake Washington water used in alevin behavior testa. 110 range during four dewatering tests in each of the three developmental stages tested is reported for chinook (Table 40) and pink (Table 41). At each developmental stage the pink alevins had a higher percentage of alevins surviving by moving downward through the substrate. Early observations indicated that alevins of both species were moving into the current (positive rheotaxis) as well as downward. The aquarium was divided lengthwise into four sections (upstream to downstream) by alevin barriers and the number of alevins collected in each trap is presented in Figure 36 for chinook and Figure 37 for pink. 6.5.4 Velocity-Studies Data collected during velocity studies on coho, chum and steelhead alevins are presented in Figures 38. 39 and 40, respectively. In the early stage of development very few coho and chum alevins moved from the gravel staging area. Steelhead alevins showed considerable random movement after 16 hours in the 0 velocity experiment. There was also some movement in the medium and high velocity expertmenta for early stage steelhead. The middle developmental stage results for all three species showed similar trends. There waa random movement (both "upstream" and "downstream") in the 0 velocity tests and little or no downstream movement (negative rheotropism) occurred in medium and high incubation flows. The alevins of all three species studied remained in the gravel staging area when velocity was adequate. When alevins in high velocity experiments did move during the late developmental stages it was generally into the current (positive rheotropic behavior). In the last developmental stage, shortly before emergence, the results for all three species were similar in the zero velocity tests with the alevins demonstrating random dispersal. There were some differences between the - lll Table 40. Percent mortaliey of chinook salmon alevins dewatered at 3 inches/hour. - >~ Average % ,.,.. Dewater rate mcrtality Date % Button up (inches/hour) (4 tests} ~ge ~ 12-26-81 0 (batch} Jf 1-1-82 S-10 3 95 (88-100) - 1-18-82 4Q-60 3 48 (22-84) -2-1-82 8Q-90 3 18 (6-32) Table 41. Perc:e.nt mortall.ty of tdnk salmon alevins dewa1;ered at 3 inches /ho,~. ~' Average % Dewater rate mcrtality -Date % Button up (inches/hour) (4 tests} Range .... 12-29-81 0 (hatch) 1-5-82 S-10 3 88 (72-100) ,_ 1-21-82 4Q-60 3 34 (18-62) 2-5-82 8Q-90 3 8 (2-24) 15- z 2 10-.,_ u Ill Cit ~ z ;: 5--c I 1 112 I 2 SECTION I I I 3 I OF AQUARIA I I 4 I Figure 36. · 'Number of chinook salmon alenns trapped per 15- z ~ 10-.,_ u Ill In ~ z :; ... 5--c 1 I section after moving toward inlet (1) or·outlet (4). 1 I 2 S~CTION I I 3 I OF ACUARIA I I 4 . Figure 37. Number of pink salmon alevins trapped per section after moving toward inlet (1) or outlet (4). ZERO en z > w -A. c( MEDIUM ... z &LI u a: &LI IL HIGH •• .. 41 21 • 1111 .. .. .. 2t • 1110 .. 10 41 20 • 1 EARLY ··········· ·aJl·.:..--- 4 I 12112124 ] MIDDLE ,----------- • • • n w u u TIME IN HOUR& / I I LATE UQ£NP -NO RESPONSE --POSITIVE NEGATIVE -· ,----- ---------- I 4 f 12 II 21 24 Fig. 38. Coho alevin behavior in zero, medium, and high veloci~y tests at early, middle. and late developmental stages. ZERO Cll z -> IU -'· c( MEDIUM ... z IU u a: w CL HIGH EARLY MtDPLE LATE lEGEND IDI -NO RESPONSE --POSITIVE .... NEGATIVE u .... .... ... ... 41 .. .. . . 21 _,..;:.· ..... -. ,---.. ··~·u.·--·re· \ ••• • • • • • .. "J,J"!! ".!! •,!!·;:·..:.: .,. •• .. I 180 10 II .. ........... 21 . • -------1\--- •••••••••••••o<~••~--...-·················· I 100 10 10 40 ,---- Zl I • • 12 II 28 24 I • • 12 •• lQ 24 I ~ ' 12 II 28 24 TIME IN HOURS Fig. 39. Chum alevin behavior in zero, medium, and high velocity tests at early, middle, and late developmental stages. '.'ttf 1-' .... .j::- ZERO co z -> w .... c( MEDIUM ... z w u a: w ... HIGH EARLY [I -.:!" II II 41 '· 21 ..... -. .., --::; .... .......... I 1111 .. .. 41 21 .I I ""---.n.-r-· ..... ·-· 100 u .. 48 21 I • • IJ II II 24 MIDDLE . . .. .. ........ ··········· -----. --,..,--- ,.---------•••••••••••• *.,. •••• I 4 I U M U H TIME IN HOUR& l LATE lEGfND -NO RESPONSE --POSITIVE •••• NEGATIVE ., ..... . . .. ·:._----.•., ,:;-·""' 1.: ,.---- / I .• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • a • •• IiI IZIIZIZ4 Fig. 40. S teelhead a levin behavior in zero, ntedium 1 and high velocity tea ta at early, middle, and late developmental stages. ...... ...... ln 116 species in the tests with medium and high velocity. The coho alevins showed only positively rheotactic responses to both velocity levels with no alevins moving downstream. !he chum alevins demonstrated greater negative rheotaxis in the medium velocity but not in the high velocity studies. Ihe steelhead alevins showed some negative rheotaxis but the majority of the alevins moved upstream. In all three species the alevins responded mere quickly to the environmental stimulus as their stage of development progressed from post- hatching to pre-emergent. 6.5.5 Dissolved Oxygen Studies Y-maze experiments on the effect of dissolved oxygen levels on the movement of alevins were tested on coho and chum (late developmental stages) and all stages of steelhead trout and are presented in Tables 42, 43, and 44, respectively. The level of dissolved oxygen and percentage of alevins remaining or moving into the staging area and each of the arms of the Y-maze are reported. In all oases where movement occurred the greater percentage of alevins moved into the arm with the higher dissolved oxygen level. 6.5.6 Photobehavioral Studies The results of experiments to determine the behavioral response of alevina to light are reported for coho (Figure 41), chum (Flgure 42), and steelhead alevins (Figure 43). Photonegative behavior for all three species increased during the early developmental stages. This avoidance of light was strongest during the middle to late developmental stages with a rapid reversal to neutral or positive photobehavior as time of emergence neared. ~~!if!, """' {_ - F"' 117 Table 42. Percentage of coho salmon alevins remaining in staging area and migrating to high and low dissolved oxygen levels in arms of Y-maze. Incubation Length High DO Azm Low DO Arm Staging area day (after of DO DO DO hatching) test % Alevin level % Alevin level % Alevin level 35 3hr 70.0 11.0 3.3 3.5 26.7 6.8 38 2hr 60.0 11.2 0.00 3.4 40.0 1.3 40 2hr 70.0 10.2 23.3 7.0 6.6 8.7 Table 43. Percentage ·af chum s&Jmon a:levins remaining in staging ·area- and migTating to high and low clissolved oxygen levels in a'CilS of Y-maze. Incubation Length RigS DO Arm Low DO Am St:aginz area day (after of DO DO DO hatching) test % Alevin level % Alevin level % Alevin level 39 14 hr 33.3 10.8 0.0 3.2 66.6 7.4 40 3 hr 60.0 U.2 3.33 3.5 36.7 7.3 41 2 hr 70.0 11.2 10.0 5.2 20.0 7.2 42 3hr 60.0 10.2 33.3 7.0 6.7 8.7 42 2 hr 70.0 11.0 3.33 8.1 26.7 8.9 118 Table 44. Percen~age of steelhead alevins rema1n1ng in staging area and migrating ~o high and low dissolved oxygen levels in arms of Y-maze. Incubation Time High 02 Low o2 Not moving day (after of ha~ching) test % Alevin DO % Alevin DO % Alevin DO 6 18 hr 3.3 9.5 3.3 6.0 93.3 7.8 7 3 hr 6.6 9.5 3.3 2.5 90.0 8.5 7 18 hr 33.3 10 0.0 2.0 66.6 5.7 10 8 hr 53.3 10 3.3 2.0 43.4 6.0 12 4 hr 63.3 8.5 0.0 3.0 36.7 5.5 13 2.5 hr 53.3 6.1 0.0 2.3 46.7 4.1 14 1.5 hr 44.0 7.8 28 6.7 28 7.2 14 2.0 hr 33.0 9.9 5.3 7.1 14 8.4 15 2.0 hr 56.7 8.7 16.7 4.5 26.6 6.5 i, , l ' 1 ) ' ' ] 100 80 U) z > w .... oc( 60 ... z w u ~ w A. 40 20 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 DAYS AfTER JiATCHING Fig. 41. Coho alevtn photobehavior from hatching to ell)ergence. en z > 100 80 ~ 60 <( 1-z 1&1 0 0:: ~ 40 20 0 5 10 16 20 25 DAYS AfTER HATCHING Fig. 42. Chum alevin photobehavior from hatching to emergence. I I I I I I I I 30 35 en z 100 80 ~ 60 ..J o( t-:z 11.1 0 a: : 40 20 0 5 10 15 20 25 DAYS AFUft HAlCHING Fig. 43. Steelhead alevin photobehavior from hatching to emergence. 30 122 6.6 Fry Stranding 6.6.1 Salmon 6.6.1.1 Abundance of Salmon Fry The abundance data and indices for sites 1, 2, and 3 are presented in Table 45. The abundance of fry varied significantly between study sites, years and dates within sites and years. The Marblemount site consistently had the highest abundance of fry. These site-specific variances in fry abundance are related to the spawning ground distribution of the adults and the dispersal characteristics of the try. 6.6.1.2 Stream Flow The·regulated flows which SCL provided for these studies were measured at the Newhalem U.S.G.S. {12-1780) gage. The influence of tributary inflow at Newhalem on daily hourly discharge is illustrated by comparing Figures 44, 45, 46, 47 and 48 with Figures 49, SO, 51, 52 and 53 which give the flows at Marblemount for the same period. Table 46 presents the downramp rate (cfs/hr), downramp (time), time factor by site and tributary inflow. The regulated flows provided a variety of downramp rates between 360 and 2,760 cfs per hour. During the three year study period the tributary inflow was more variable in 1980 than in 1981 or 1982. During the test done by Phinney in 1973 the tributary inflow was about one-half that experienced in 1980, 1981 and 1982. This is reflected in the average minimum flows for all tests reached each year at the Marblemount gage {12-1810) with a discharge of 2,300 cfs at the Gorge powerhouse (1973, 3,000 cfs; 1980, 3,750 cfs; 1981, 3,470 cfs; 1982, 3,418). 6.6.1.3 Stranding Index vs. Time Factor The computed stranding indices for the study sites 1, 2 and 3 are 1 Table 45. Chinook salmon fry abundance and stranding data for 1980• 1981. and 1982. Stud! Site No. 1 Stud~ Site No. 2 Stud! Site No. 3 Electro-Electro-Electro- fishing Stranding fishing Stranding fishing Stranding Date No. Index No. llide¥ Ho. Index No. Index Ho. Index No. Index 3/23/80 12 1.20 17 15.00 61 3.21 30 9.66 19 2. 71 18 7.01 3/24/80 10 1.00 3 4.00 19 1.00 8 9.00 7 1.00 23 24.00 3/30/80 25 2.50 3 1.60 158 8.32 18 2.28 9 1.29 7 6.20 3/31/80 45 4.50 2 0.67 171 9.00 14 1.67 10 1.43 19 13.99 4/13/80 46 4.60 3 0.87 171 9.00 0 0.11 36 5.14 10 2.14 4/14/80 42 4.20 1 0.48 298 15.68 0 0.06 23 3.29 6 2.13 3/24/81 46 1.48 2 2.03 218 3.11 7 2.57 78 4.88 79 16.39 3/25/81 31 1.00 1 a.oo 109 1.56 1 1.28 31 1.94 4 2.58 3/26/81 37 1.19 1 0.84 70 1.00 26 27.00 20 1.25 49 40.00 3/27/81 61 1.97 3 2.03 122 1.74 2 1.72 16 1.00 15 16.00 .... 3/31/81 127 4.10 0 0.24 162 2.~1 5 2.60 68 4.25 6 1.65 N w 3/10/82 192 6.62 8 1.36 86 1.48 2 2.03 130 4.48 10 2.46 3/11/82 101 3.48 92 1.59 1 1.26 63 2.17 0 0.46 3/12/82 79 2. 72 3 1.47 134 2.31 5 2.60 43 1.48 6 4. 73 3/17/82 97 3. 34 2 0.90 104. 1. 79 5 3. 35 35 1.21 27 23.14 3/18/82 55 1.90 1 1,05 105 1.81 3 2.21 56 1.93 62 32.64 3/19/82 29 1.00 0 1.00 62 1.07 5 5.61 37 1.28 35 28.13 3/30/82 134 4.62 6 1.52 163 2.81 8 3.20 61 2.10 68 32.86 3/31/82 3 0.89 87 1.50 3 2.67 57 1.97 27 14.21 4/1/82 129 4.45 1 0.45 58 1.00 11 11.00 74 2.55 62 24.71 4/2/82 76 2.62 0 o. 38 97 1.67 2 1.80 35 1.21 9 8.26 4/7/82 117 2.02 3 1.98 35 1.21 15 13.22 4/8/82 122 2.10 38 18.57 29 1.00 98 99.00 SKRG IT R • AT NEWHALEM -MARCH. 1980 SUNOAY tDIDAY TUESDAY HEONESOAY THURSDAY fRIDAY SATURDAY ~I I 1 88 1-86 w •• w 12 LL 1"\. ~ -./ '-.../~ 7'/ --' / ~ 110 z 2 l 4 s 6 7 8 1--t 88 r-88 t5 8t 1--t 82 r-"""-~ ....-.. .£ 'V ---... J w flO :c 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 8& ~· 88 ffi •• 82 .I ,---/"-..-~ -....,. ~· -...;;;J ....... ..... v- flO 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 118 88 " 82 -\_ / \. 1 ..._, ~ -r' __..A. -_/ flO 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Figure 44. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Newbalem (USGS) , Mar ell 1980. t-w w lL z t-4 t- iS t-4 w :c J . . ' j SKAGIT R. AT NEWHRLEM -APRIL 1980 88 88 •• 12 eo SUNDAY [\. TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSOOY ffUDRY SATURDAY .r--"'- --...... - 1 2 3 4 s ~~=I §47 §f ;;tCs. J4 ~ eo 6 1 a 9 10 11 12 88 88 .. 12 80 I u ~ _;- 14 ~~~ t~ 80 20 21 ~I I 27 28 '-../"\ r '"_/ !!) lb H-I I 22 23 I ~~~-I 29 30 '"r--\r\. f'. -- 11 J.U J.~ 24 I 25 I 26 I I I I Figure 45·. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Newhalem (USGS). April 1980. SKAGIT R. AT NEWHRLEM -MARCH 1981 1-- ttj LL. z • • 14 12 10 18 88 .. • 10 t-i 18 SIH1AY 1 , __ u .. 14 12 10 1____., 15 ~ 22 ~ .c:: 29 2 - 9 16 I r-' 23 I 30 TUE600Y WEONESOAY TtlfiSOOY fRIDAY &Al't.fiOAY ~ -~ ~-- 3 4 s 6 7 '-r-...._ ~ ·ro-If 12 13 14 ,..._,. ...._ ------ 17 18 19 20 21 I~ ~ ls:z ~ J ~ L .t. 24 25 26 27 28 ~· l I I I I 31 Figure 46, Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Newhalem (USGS). March 1981. ) -J SKAGIT Ra AT NEWHALEM -MARCH 1982 SUNDAY t10NOAY TUESDAY HEONE5DAY TtllR50AY fRIDAY SATURDAY ~I I r 1~ \1 t ~fv= p=~ %d 1 2 3 4. 5 6 28 29 30 31 Figure 47• Hourly sage height data for Skagit River at Newhalem (USGS), 1-w w lL z t-i SKAGIT R. AT NEWHALEM -APRIL 1982 U8 86 84 82 80 SUNDAY 1--' 4 11 25 ttONOAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY fRIDAY SATURDAY 1 2 3 -~ c./ ~ J \ J \_} 1--1 "' 5 6 7 8 9 10 1~ 122PiSI I 12 13 14 15 16 17 26 27 28 29 30 Figure 4a. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Newhalem (USGS), 1-' N 00 1- SKAGIT R. AT MARBLEMOUNT -MARCH 1980 5UNOAY t1tlNOAY TUESOAY WEONESOAY THURSOAY fRIDAY SATURDAY '! I I ~ 1 II 8 1-, w li w lJ_ a -~ -- ' z 2 J 4 5 6 7 8 t-t u 8 1-, lS I --t-t a w I :r: ~ 10 11 12 13 14 15 ll ~ 8 ., ffi & a J ............ ~ --- I 16 17 us 19 20 2 1 22 '!-~=~~~ I ~ I I I . I I - 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 l I I I I I I I ..c: -tit:. 30 31 Figure 49 • Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS). March 1980. SKAGIT R. AT MARBLEMOUNT APRIL 1980 5UNDAY HONOAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSORY fRIDAY SATURDAY Ia 8 ., 6 ,_ 3 1 1 2 l 4 5 ll 8 ._ ., ttl I lL 8 -- l z 6 7 8 9 10 ll 12 ....... u $ t-., ~ I ....... 3 .....-..... ...... -w 1 :c ll 14 1.5 1() 17 18 19 u ~ 8 ., g 6 -8 I :w :n 22 23 24 25 2b n 8 ., & 8 1 27 :I:H 29 JU Figure 50 .• Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS), April 1980. ...... w 0 t-w w 1..&- z t-t ........ w :c j SKAGIT R. AT MARBLEMOUNT l1 a ., 5 3 1 11 a _., fi 3 l u I) ., & 3 l ll a ., & I 1 u I) ., & I 1 SUNDAY 1 u 15 ~~ 29 t10NOAY TUESDAY WEONESOAY THURSDAY --··-. 2 3 q s A 9 10 ll 12 16 17 18 19 ~j llf l:l -zo 30 31 MARCH 1981 fRIDfiY SATURDAY 6 7 ll 14 20 21 ll ~ts Figure ~l-· Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS) a •tarch 1981. SKAGIT R. AT MARBLEMOUNT -MARCH 1982 SUNOAY tDilAY TUESDAY HEONESDAY TtlJRSDRY fRIDAY SATURDAY ·~I I ~ I ~ I J .c:=:-: ,.. ,.. I - ~~ 1 2 l 4 5 6 'j I { I~ 1-~ I~ id t-w w c:. lL I' ...... r-:, " ~ z 1 8 . 9 10 11 12 13 .,_... 'j I b~ 1~-= t b I : ~ t- 5 ...... £. --,__ w ...... N w :r: 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 -~ 'j I I I I I I I ~ - 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 ·~I I ~ I =~ ~ &. I I I I 28 29 30 31 Figure 52. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS), ] -) l ] ' ) --1 SKAGIT R. AT MARBLEMOUNT -APRIL 1982 SlHJAY HONORY TUESDAY HEDNESORY TttUftSOAY FRIDAY SRTURDRY '! I I I ~· I ~ 1 2 l '! I I I I I I t-~ = w w ~ ,-. IJ.. - z 4 s 6 7 8 9 10 ·. - t-t '! I ~ ~ ~ ~ I t- 5 .... ;; ...., < < ,......._ w ...... w :c 11 12 u 14 15 16 17 ~ l I I I I -1 I~ I ffi c:::. --= 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 l I -~ I I ~: f==-1 :1 : c:. r ... 25 26 27 28 29 30 Figure 53. llour1y gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS), Table 46. Stream flow data during the downramping studies, 1980, 1981, and 1982. Ramp rate Start End Time factor Tributary Date cfa/hr time time Site 1 Site 2 Site 3 inflow, cfs 3/23/80 1,454 1:15 AM 2:45 AM 1.13 4.63 7.63 1,164 3/24/80 603 10:00 PM 2:20 AM 1.00 4.25 7.25 1,092 3/30/80 357 8:30 PM 3:45 AM 2.37 5.87 8.87 1,066 3/31/80 870 12:30 AM 3:10 AM 1.82 5.32 8. 32 997 4/13/80 436 8:30 PM 1:30 AM 1.00 4.08 7.08 1,320 4/14/80 714 10:20 PU 1145 AM 1.00 4.37 7.37 1,973 3/24/81 941 11:00 PM 1:30 AM 1.00 3.42 6.42 1,077 3/25/81 836 9:50 PM 12:40 AM 1.00 2.62 5.62 1,138 3/26/81 966 11:40 PM 2:00 AM 1.00 4.00 7.00 1,066 3/27/81 402 7:00 PM 12:15 AM 1.00 2.25 5.25 1,066 ...... w 3/31/81 889a 9:15 PM 2:30 AM 1.15 4.65 7.65 1,523 .!>- 3/10/82 384a 9:00 PM 2:30 AM 1.00 3.95 6.95 1,509 3/11/82 624a 9:00 PM 12:30 AM 1.00 2.00 5.00 1,853 3/12/82 583 8 9:20 PM 1:05 AM 1.00 2.52 5.52 1,661 3/17/82 715 10:30 PM 2:00 AM 1.00 3.62 6.62 1.317 3/18/82 747 10:30 PM 1:30AM 1.00 3.16 6.16 1.242 3/19/82 2.100 12:01 AM 1:05 AM 1.00 2.83 5.83 1.231 3/30/82 2,179b 12:00 PM 1:00 AM 1.00 2.88 5.88 1,190 3/31/82 560b 8:00 PM 1:.00 AM 1.00 2.85 5.85 1.120 4/1/82 700b 10:00 PM 3:00 AM 1.68 5.18 s'.18 1,155 4/2/82 2.757b 10:00 PH 11:06 PM 1.00 1.32 4.32 1,083 4/7/82 1,987 10:00 PM 11:15 PM 1.00 1.63 4.63 . 1.ooo 4/8/82 2,070 2:00 AM 3:03 AM 1.97 4.47 8.47 1.033 aVariable ramp rate per the Skagit interim flow agreement, number is the average rate. b rate due to ramping stage per hour rate, number is the average rate. Variable ramp at a 135 presented in !able 45. !here is considerable variance in st•anding indices both within and between sites. The stranding index relates to all salmon fry. The apparent relationship between the occurrence of gravel bar dewatering during daylight hours as a result of downramping and the incidence of fry stranding for 1980-81 and 82 tests was examined by plotting the computed time factors versus the stranding indices for study sites 1, 2 and 3 (Figures 54, -~ 55 and 56), respectively. The length of time dewatering occurred at each site during daylight hours for any given downramp was related to the completion time of downramping at Newhalem and the distance of the site downstream. At study site 1, Figure 54, nearest Newhalem the majority of dewatering was completed at or prior to dawn; at site 2, Figure 55, an intermediate distance downstream completion generally ranged from 1-5 hours after dawn; and at site ~-3, Figure 56, the farthest downstream from Newhalem completion occurred approximately 3-8 hours after dawn. Coincident with a greater amount of daylight dewatering at sites farther downstream from Newhalea was a progressively higher incidence of stranded fry. The stranding indices for sites 1, 2 and 3 were generally less than 5, 10, and 40 at each respective site progressing downstream. Two other factors, ramp rate and tributary inflow, were examined within the framework of the time factor vs stranding analysis to gain insight on the influence of these factors on the incidence of stranding. The ramp rate corresponding to each of the time factors was categorized as either high >1400 cfs or moderate <1000 cfs as indicated in the Figures 5~6 by the appropriate symbol. Inspection of these figures indicates a tendency of higher ramp rates to be associated with higher incidences of fry stranding. This, however, may be an artifact of test conditions since downramping at lower rates requires initiation at earlier times at night when compared to higher ~ates. !he net STRANDIIG 1m 15 -X to 1-- 5 0 - • • J • .a • • I 0 2 TUE fACTM Figure 54. Stranding index vs. time factor for study site·no. 1, 1980 1 81 1 82 data combined. X -high ramp rate >1400 cfs/hri * ~ moderate ramp rate <1000 cfs/hr; 0 "' high tributary inflow >1300 cfs and moderate ramp rate. 9 STIWIJUG IIID 25 - 00 - X 15 1- • 10 1-• X 5 -X 0 I a 0 • • 0 • X X y • 0 • I • I I I I 0 2 9 4 5 a Tl~ fACfll Figure 55. Stranding index vs. time factor for study site no. 2, 1980, 81, 82 data combined. X "' high ramp rate >1400 cfa/hr; * "' moderate ramp rate <1000··.cfa/hr; 0 .. high tributary inflow >1300 cfa and"'moderate ramp rate. ] 7 SliWIJitG nm 100 I) - 40 3) 0 -• X • X 0 • • f- • • X • • X lC • 0 I 1 • I 010 0 0 I I s 4 5 • 7 8 I TilE FACTII . Figure 56. Stranding index vs. time factor for study site no, 3, 1980, 81, data combined. X • high ramp rate >1400 cfs/hr; * c moderate ramp rate <1000 cfs/hr; 0 .. high tributary inflow >1300 cfs and moderate ram~ rate. 1--' w Ol 10 f.<~ - 139 effect is that with a low ramp rate much of the dewatering occurs at night although the completion time may extend well into daylight hours. With tests during periods of higher tributary inflow the stranding index vs. time factor data point was indicated by a third symbol. the majority of ramping rates during the tests with ·higher tributary inflow were of the variable type and. the moderate ramp rate category. Figures 55 and 56 indicate . markedly reduced stranding indices as a result of higher tributary inflow even at higher time factor values. A degree of caution should be exercised when evaluating the combined 198o-82 data with particular reference to the stranding indices. The stranding indices were computed independently for each year since the area sampled for abundance estimates was changed at each of the sites. This raises the question as to the validity of combining the data for all three years for a single analysis. As a case in point~ the 1980 test data in Table ~6 indicate low abundance estimates of ~ and consequently low stranding indices for many of the tests when compared to 1981 and 1982 test data. Insufficient numbers of fish potentially susceptible to stranding makes evaluation of factors such as daylight, tributary inflow or ramping rate difficult to identity. If the 1980 test data and high tributary inflow data points are removed from Figures 55 and 56 a clearer relationship of increased incidence of stranding with increased daylight dewatering emerges. A regression of the stranding indices associated with high ramp rates, above 1900 cfs/hr against the corresponding time factors resulted in R-squared values of 0.821 and 0.973 for sites 2 and 3, respectively. A similar regression for moderate ramp rates 550-750 cfs/hr resulted in R-squared values of 0.157 and 0.867 at study sites 2 and 3, respectively (Appendix II. Table 2). 140 6.6.2 Steelhead The results of the 1982 steelhead fry stranding studies are summarized in Table 47. These results indicate that more fry were stranded during darkness than in daylight hours, however, only two daylight stranding tests were conducted. In samples where large numbers of fry were stranded (19 and 24 fry/300 feet) the majority of· the fry were trapped in a large pothole area. ,. 1 J .,, ] l Table 47. Results of 1982 Skagit River steelhead fry stranding studies. ) ~ Rame Rate Location No. of Stranded Fr! Ava. Length Electrofishine; Catch Avs. Lensth Comment 8-24 Rockport 156 fry/150 feet 34 mm 1 8-25 2000cfs/hr Rockport 1 fry/425 feet 31.3 mm 2 8-26 2000cfs/hr Rockport 1 fry/425 feet 33.9 nun 90 fry/75 feet 32 nun 9-1 2000cfs/hr Rockport 8 fry/42.5 feet 32.3 mm 53 fry/100 feet 32.9 DlDl 9-1 2000cfs/hr Rockport 1 fry/425 feet 34 DlDl 3 9-2 Rockport 41 fry/100 feet 34 .1 IDIIl 9-2 2000cfs/hr Rockport no fry found 3 9-8 2000cfs/hr Marblemount 19 fry/300 feet 36.9 IJliD 130 fry/100 feet 34.7 mm 4 9-8 2000cfs/hr Rockport 6 fry/450 feet 32,7 D11D 63 fry/100 feet 36 mm 9-9 2000cfs/hr Marblemount 24 fry/300 feet 36 .6 lllDl 5 9-9 2000cfa/hr Rockport 1 fr;:y/425 feet 33.9 DIDl 9-14 2000cfs/hr Marblemount 1 fry/300 feet 50 mm 65 fry/100 feet: 36 mm 6 9-14 2000cfa/hr Rockport 1 fry/425 feet 36 mm 9-15 2000cfs/hr Marblemount 4 frY /300 feet 35.8 mm 6 ,...... 9-15 2000cfs/hr Rockport no fry found 6 .&:- 9-21 2000cfa/hr MarbleJQount 4 fry/300 feet 37.3 IJllll ,...... 9-22 lOOOcfs/hr Marblemount no fry found 7 9-23 lOOOcfs/hr Marblemount 1 fry/300 feet 39 nun 67 fry/100 feet 38.9 IIIIQ 1. Fry 1 moved nearshore on rising water, offshore on dropping water levels 2. Stranded fry found near high water mark 3. Daylight downramping; peak 11:00 am to 149.5 cfa by 2;00 pm at Gorge 4. Most stranded fry from large pothole area at downstream end at study site 5. 16 of 24 stranded fry from pothole area 6. No fry found in pothole area or near study site 7. Nearshore area diatu~bed by spawning chinook salmon 142 7.0 DISCUSSION 7.1 Escapements, Spawner Distribution and Area Spawned The boat and aerial surveys performed by WDF and WDG during the past few years provide a valuable data base that has been and will be used in evaluation of the effects of flow fluctuation on the salmonid ~esource in the Skagit River. The spawning distribution for each species obtained from these surveys will aid in establishing the degree to which the percentage of the spawning population (and subsequent life stages) using each river section is affected by flow fluctuations. Determination of the timing of spawning allows prediction, based on temperature unit accumulation, of the occurrence of later life stages and the critical times when these stages may be subjected to adverse flow fluctuations. The documentation of spawning activity by aerial photos was also instrumental in the selection of representative ~eaches for the current IFIH study. 1.2 Adult Spawning Behavior-Flow Fluctuation Relationship An adverse relationship between flow fluctuation and spawning adults has thus far not been demonstrated at least for a significant segment of the " population of any salmonid species. in the Skagit River. This ~esults f~om the temporary nature of dewatering and the flexible behavioral response of the adult feaales. In addition, it has been difficult to demonstrate that spawning habitat is a limiting factor but is more likely augmented by the present interim minimum flow agreement. The problem which exists is the timing of the increase in river discharge which dictates the level of spawning in the channel and sets the level of the discharge regime to be maintained throughout the remaining incubation period. One of the objectives of the IFIM study being initiated is to determine the flows which begin to limit the - - 143' habitat for spawning. Flow fluctuations occurring during habitat limiting discharges may then be of significance and need to be expressed as loss of habitat. 7.3 Instream Incubation Tests Steelhead trout eggs were incubated in the Skagit River to determine the temperature units required to reach emergence. This information, when coupled with timing of spawning and the Skagit River temperature regime, will be used to predict periods during incubation when embryonic development is sensitive to fluctuations that result in temporary dewatering, when fry emergence from the graveloccmrs or when emigrant fry are susceptible to stranding. An attempt was made to monitor the effects of flow fluctuations, in particular, dewatering on the survival of chum salmon embryos placed in artificial redds in the-Skagit River. The very low survival rates encountered in both control and test incubation containers rendered the experiments inconclusive. A flood in late January followed by moderate widely fluctuating flows in February and March resulted in a progressive intrusion of sediment into the incubation boxes which was the chief component causing mortality of the embryos. Beseta and Jackaon (1978) have shown that transport of fine ~ sediment occurs during· periods o£ high. flows followed by sediment deposition. and intrusion during periods of low flow. The present study demonstrated that sediment became solidly packed in both freezer containers and w-v boxes smothering the eggs and/or alevins. the difficulty experienced in attempting to incubate artificially enclosed eggs in the Skagit River prompted the initiation of studies on the effects of flow reduction on eggs and alevins under laboratory conditions where such physical parameters as flow. sedimentation and temperature could be controlled. 144 7.4 Laboratory Incubation Tests Evaluations of the comparative survival of eggs and alevins from chinook, chum, coho, and pink salmoD and steelhead trout subjected to various daily dewatering times in several substrate types indicated a high prehatching survival for all species and a decrease in post-hatching survival in direct relation to the length of successive daily dewaterings. Moreover, tolerance to single dewatering events of various times decreased as development of alevins progressed. Recent laboratory studies by Reiser and White (1981) with chinook salmon and steelhead trout and Becker et al. (1982) with chinook salmon afford some comparison with these results. Reiser and White, for example, concluded from their studies that salmonid eggs are extremely tolerant to long periods of dewatering (1-5 weeks) without any significant effect on hatching. These findings are confirmed by field observations in which high prehatching survival was reported for brown trout (~ trutta) (Hobbs 1937) and chinook salmon redds dewatered fa~ 3 to 5 weeks (Hawke, 1978). In contrast, Becker et al. 1980 found that survival of "cleavage" eggs, the developmental period -~extending from fertilization to eyed stage, declined to nearly 30~ when dewatered· dailY' for 16 hrs-. The: authors suggested. this mortality was not due to dewatering alone but also to higb temperatures resulting from insolation -encountered durin• the testing. In light of the high survival found in our studies, those of Reiser and White (1981) and the field observations, it appears that temperature was a major contributing factor in the mortality observed in Becker's experiments. The abrupt decrease in survival following hatching observed in our studies differs substantially from that reported by Becker et al 1982 for erythroembryos, the developmental phase extending from hatching to advanced .. .r -- - - - - 145 yolk-sac alevins. The survival levels in their studies after 20 successive dewaterings of 2 and 4 hours daily were surprisingly high at 90 and 56~. respectively. In our studies survival had declined to less than lOS·within 10 days for the same daily dewatering times for all species and gravel sizes tested. Surviving alevins in our studies were those that migrated downward through the substrate to the water retained at the bottom of the redd. It iS difficult to account for the differences in results when one considers that the size range of gravel substrates used in our experiments bracketed those of Becker et al. and furthermore that the same general pattern of survival was repeated for all species tested over different temperature regimes. No explanation for this difference iS presently available. A marked decrease to tolerance to single dewatering events was evident as alevin development progressed from hatching to emergence in the present studies. Immediately following hatching, survival after dewatering a single time for a hr was on the order o£ 90S; however, when alevins were dewatered for one hour just prior to emergence mortality was often greater than 90S. The relatively higb. tolerance o£ prehatching developmental stages (eggs) to dewatered and static water conditions when compared to the high susceptabili.ty of post-hatching. stages, (alevins) may· be· explained. in terms of the morphological and physiological changes that occur at the time of hatching. Prior to hatching the chorionic membrane provides the embryo with a protective barrier against adverse environmental conditions and yet allows for the diffusion of oxygen and elimination of metabolic wastes. When the egg hatches, this protective barrier is lost and the alevin becomes progressively more dependent on branchial respiration as the yolk sac is absorbed. Coincident with alevin development is decreased survival in dewatered conditions and increased survival in statio water conditions. Increases in 146 physical activity that accompany alevin development apparently allow alevins in advanced stages, when subjected to static water, to either increase water circulation across the gills and/or move from a microenvironment of depleted oxygen to one of more favorable conditions. This was most evident in the differential survival observed in the static water tests employing a range of gravel sizes. Survival was highest in the largest gravel size which facilitated movement and lowest in the smallest gravel size which greatly restricted physical activity of the alevins. Mortality resulting from dewatering is readily detected under experimental conditions; however, sublethal effects which may be of ecological significance are less obvious. In determination of condition factors for chinook and coho salmon, the alevins were incubated under optium conditions in a compartmentalized Heath incubator for 6 to 10 weeks folloWing testing. This time may have allowed the alevins to compensate for any deviations from normal development present Umaediately after testing. Reiser (1981) in a similar study found that embryos that were continuously watered produced alevins that were significantly longer and heavier than dewatered embryos. However, after two months of rearing he found that· fry produced: from: dewatered· embryos-were~ significantly longer and heavier and had "higher condition factors than fry from watered embryos. Although no explanations o£ these results was provided, it appears that the conditions under which alevins or fry are reared may significantly alter differences in · the condition factors, lengths or weights present immediately following testing. The development of embryos was evaluated within a few days following hatching during studies in the second year. Consequently, the stress of dewatering was exerted primarily on the egg phase which may in part explain .~ - 147 the lack of significance between control and test regimes. Since alevins within all test groups died ~n after hatching it was not possible to evaluate the effects of dewatering on alevins alone. However, in the study by Becker et al. (1982), in Which morta+ity was not as rapid, dewatering of alevins resulted in statistically significant decreases in lengths and weights. The importance of these decreases in condition factors particularly if the alevins are returned to optimum environment, are unknown. Caution should be exercised if these laboratory data· are to be applied to actual field situations. In these studies environmental parameters which may significantly affect survival of embryos such as freezing, insolation by the sun or intrusion of sediments, were controlled. Application of the laboratory studies to the field are fUrther complicated when one considers the protracted· nature ot the spawning season for some of the species. Instances during incubation will arise when highly tolerant eggs of one species and highly susceptible alevins of another are dewatered concurrently. Moreover, the toler~nce of alevins to dewatering varies with development. Considering the asynchrony of spawning and the range in susceptibility of the various phases of embryonic development to dewatering, it becomes apparent that a conservative approach is required to predict the consequences of dewatering events to the mast sensitive phase. 148 7.5 Intragravel Alevin Survival, Movement and Behavior 7.5.1 Dewatering Behavior Studies (1981 and 82) Preliminary experiments in 1981 indicated that chinook, coho and steelhead alevins were capable of making rapid downward migrations through selected gravel s~zes to avoid dewatered environments. The difference in numbers of alevins of each species capable of making downward migrations can probably be attributed to size differences between the species. The larger chinook alevins made fewer successful migrations than smaller coho and steelhead through the large gravel and no recorded migrations in the small, medium or mixed gravels. other laboratory studies (Bjornn 1969, Phillips et al. 1913) have shown that steelhead alevins have a higher survival to emergence than chinook or coho when incubated in the same size gravel. The smaller steelhead alevins were believed to be better able to migrate through the restricted interstices than the chinook or coho alevins* The aquaria dewatering studies of steelhead alevins in 1981 indicated that rate of dewatering and developmental stage of the alevin were directly related to the percentage of alevins making successful downward migration. The results of the 1982 dewatering studies on chinook and pink alevins again demonstrated that the size and the stage of development of the alevin are critical factors in ability to migrate through the gravel. As the alevins absorb their yolk sacs and become more fusiform in shape they are capable of migrating through gravel interstices more rapidly. The development of fins and musculature allows for better swimming ability. Other studies on yolk sac fry of chinook salmon indicate an increased swimming ability with a reduction in yolk sac size (Thomas et al. 1977). Early stage yolk sac alevins were found to be hydrodynamically inferior to streamlined fry with less yolk. 149 These studies, while not carried out in gravel substrates, suggest that movement may increase with advancing development of the alevin. Aquaria studies in 1982 on chinook and pink alevins indicated there was a general tendency for both species to move downward through the gravel substrate within the first 48 hours after hatching. Dill (1969) also observed an immediate post-hatching downward movement in aquarium studies of coho alevins. The extent of the downward movement was greater in large sravel (3.2.-6.3 em) than in small gravel (1.9-3.2 em). Downward movement was also reported in a s~udy of brown trout (~ trutta) ale~ins (Roth and Geiger, 1963). However, in both these studies the downward movement was believed to result tram negative phototactic behavior. Intragravel movement is an adaptation demonstrated by alevins to avoid stress. HatChing, normal or premature, gives the orgaaiam mobility previously lacking in the embryo stage. Bams (1969), in observations on sockeye alevins, reports that under favorable conditions there is no intragravel migration untU emergence. Young alevins could be induced to migrate in random directiona through the gravel by reducing the now of water. Random dispersal may potentially reduce stress by increasing the distance between alevins and by relocation of some alevins in more favorable areas. Older sockeye alevins demonstrated normal emergence behavior and migrated to open water to avoid low intergravel oxygen levels. Bams also found that both experimentally increased C02 levels and increased numbers of alevins per crevice greatly increased the activity level of alevins. He felt that changes in the micro-environment due to the number of fish present was a factor. Very high sediment levels in the intragravel water also caused movement of the alevins. The aquaria dewatering studies indicated there was a direct relationship between the number of alevins making successful migrations and the size of the 150 gravel substrate studied. Interstitial spaces in larger gravel allowed greater movement of alevins through the substrate. Numerous field and laboratory studies have been conducted on the relationship between emergence of salmonid alevins and the composition of the gravel substrate in the redds (Wickett, 1958; Cobel, 1961; McNeil and Abnell, 196~; Koski, 1966; Hall and Lantz, 1969; Bjornn, 1969 in Reiser and Bjornn, 1979; Hausel, 1973; Phillips et al, 1975; and McCuddin, 1917 in Reiser and Bjornn, 1979). These studies demonstrate that fine sediment, usually less than 3 mm in diameter is inversely related to salmonid survival to emergence. Timing of emergence varied considerably between these studies. Phillips, et alo, (1915), reported premature emergence of smaller try with increasing concentrations of fines. Hausle and Coble (1976) found that increasing fines slowed emergence. Dill and Horthcote (1970) noted that survival to emergence and timing of emergence were not affected when testing several larger gravel sizes without fines. Koski ( 1975) in studies ot chum alevins emerging tram sand gravel mixtures found that smaller try emerged from gravel containing a high percentage of sand. He suggested that there was a selective mortality against the larger try in high sand substrates. Coho alevins in some instances demonstrated the ability to migrate downward through the medium, small and standard mix gravel samples. This ability was attributed to their smaller size. The ability to migrate downward through smaller gravels becomes significant, especially in the mixed gravel which contained sand. Eams (1969) in studies of sockeye emergence noted that alevins migrating upward when confronted with a sand barrier exhibited a "butting" behavior. The alevins thrust headfirst upward loosening the sand grains which fell downward past the fish allowing it to tunnel out. This behavior would be of little utility in downward migrations. - - - - ''''"' 151 7.5.2 Velocity Studies The 1982 studies on the effect of velocity on the movement of coho, chum and steelhead alevins revealed four trends. First, alevins in zero velocity studies bad no current to orient to and they dispersed randomly through the three sections of the test aparatus. Second, alevins te:sted in medium and high velocity studies generally stayed in the central gravel staging area indicating they had adequate incubation conditions. Third, i£ movement did occur in medium and high velocity experiments the alevins generally demon:strated a positive rheotactic response by moving upstream into the current. Finally, the length of time after stre:s:s i:s tmpo:sed before movement occurred decreased With advancing stage of alevin development. The difference in rheotactic respon:se between coho and chum in the pre-emergent developmental stage is probably the re:sult of ditterence:s in early lite history strategies. The coho remain in the river tor one year after emerging, thus a po:sitive rheotactic response would be expected. The chum try migrate down:stream to the ocean after emerging. 'Ibis would explain why pre-emergent chum alevins demonstrated a high degree of negative rheotropia while the coho showed none. The steelhead pre-emergent fry should be :similar to the coho as they have similar early lite historie:s~ They demon:strated a mixed behavior however, With positive rheotactic response about twice as large a:s negative respon:se. Several other studies have reported on lateral movements of alevins in the gravel. Dill ( l969) in recording the vertical and lateral movemen t:s of coho alevins found a negative rheotactic behavior in the downward movement and a po:sitive rheotaxi:s during the emergent upward phase. He al:so suggested that alevins were dispersing through the gravel to increase the distance between alevin:s. Other studies of salmonid alevins have shown that brown trout are negatively rheotactic during the downward phase (Bishai, 1960; Stuart, 1953), brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) are positively rheotactic at hatching (White. 1915), and brown trout are positively rheotactic during the entire alevin stage (Roth and Geiger, 1963). Bams (1969) demonstrated that sockeye and pink salmon C£. gorbuscha) a!evins are positively rheotactic in the presence of light. As can be seen tram these studies there is some controversy as to the direction of lateral movement of alevins. !he positive or negative rheotaxic component of movement may be of considerable ~portance in locating areas that have not had dissolved oxygen lowered and metabolic wastes increased due to water reuse by sibling alevins. Chapman (1962) found that the coho moved downstream in small numbers shortly after emerging from the gravel. He did not determine if this downstream movement was an inate migratory urge or just displacement by current. Other studies by Mason and Chapman (1965) indicated that the earliest emerging coho try occupied the most upstream areas of the study stream. Later studies by Mason (1976) indicated that coho fry showed a positive current reponse with 68-82S moving upstream following emergence. Neave (1955) and Hoar (1956) showed that pink. chum, and sockeye salmon fry usually migrated as individuals and were negatively rheotactic. Thus results of these: studies, on. pre-emergen~ alevins-generally are in agreement with results of other· studies· on early emergent fry of the same species or early life ~±story strategies. 7.5.3 Dissolved Oxygen Studies Experiments on the effect of dissolved oxygen levels on movement indicated that alevins were capable of detecting an oxygen gradient and migrating into the arm of the Y-maze with the higher dissolved oxygen level. !he ability to detect and migrate to the higher oxygen level could be important to the growth and ultimate survival of the alevin as several studies '!1_, - - 153 have shown. After hatching the oxygen demand of larval fishes increases markedly with age (Sharmardina 1954, from Davis, 1975). Nikiforou (1952, from Davia, 1975) found better growth in yolk sac fry of Atlantic salmon (~ ~) reared at 6.8-7.5 mg 02/liter compared with those reared at 4.5-5.0 mg o2/liter. The latter group weighed less than one-half or the high oxygen group. Brannon (1965) studied the effects of water velocity, dissolved oxygen, and light on the development and weight of sockeye C£ • .!!!!::!!,> embryos and alevina. The embryos were affected by low oxygen and light but not by velocity. The rate of alevin growth was affected by both oxygen level and velocity. These studies were conducted under hatchery conditions so the lack of gravel substrate and the high range of velocities studi'ed reduce their application to the intragravel environment. Larmoyeux and Piper (1973) found that growth was significantly reduced when o2 was less than 5.0 ppm and ammonia greater than 0.5 ppm. !hey report however that growth rate was not affected when oxygen was in excess of 7 ppm and ammonia was as high as o.a to 1.0 ppm. This study suggested that low oxygen atfeoted growth more than the ammonia levels tested. With low water flaws through salmon;redda. a combination of low oxygen and. high metabolic waste levels can occur. Movement of alevins to areas of higher dissolved oxygen_levels could be critical to their survival. 7.5.4 Photobehavioral Studies The results of the experiments to determine behavioral response of alevins to light indicated that photo-nesative behavior for all three species increased durins the early developmental stages. This avoidance of light reached a peak durins the middle to late stases of the alevina development. As time of emergence approached there was a rapid reversal to positive 154 phototactic behavior. This photo-negative response of newly hatched alevins has long been known (White, 1915; Gray, 1928). Some studies have indicated a progressive weakening of this initial photo-negativity (Stuart, 1953, Woodhead, 1957; Mason, 1976; and Dill, 1977). Bams (1969) found that sockeye salmon were negatively phototactic throughout their entire intragravel incubation and that any light inhibited emergence. Early studies by Meave ( 1955) and Hoar ( 1956) showed that pink, chum, and sockeye fry were negatively phototactic and that these initial responses eventually give way to rapid dramatic changes to neutral or positive photobehavior. Mason (1976) in studies on coho fry found that the pronounced photo- negative behavior was suddenly lessened at time of emergence but remained photo-negative. Mason refers to this retention of photo-negative response as hiding behavior in which try use the gravel bed as a refuge. The recent studies of Carey and Noakes ( 1981 ), on rainbow trout indicated the occurrence of a rapid photo response shift from negative to positive occurring at the onset of emergence and the depletion of 85~ (by volume) of the yolk reserve. The negative photobehavior of the alevins prior to emergence is probably an-adaptation to keep them-in· the gr-avel during_ development· when they would be most susceptable to predation. Carey and Noakes (1981) found that alevins initiated downward movements in an artificial turf substrate incubation system whenever light was applied above the substrate. The rapid reversal of this photobehavior at emergence allows the alevins to enter the water column above the substrate and take up the next stage of their life histories as free swimming fry. 7.6 Fry Stranding The stranding of salmon fry (Oncorhynchus spp.) on gravel and sand bars -I I - 155 and in :shallow .sloughs below hydroelectric dams as water levels recede following a peak in power production bas been well documented in Washington State (Thompson 1970; Graybill et al. 1979; Phinney 197~; Bauersfeld 1977, . 1978; Becker et al. 1981). The relationship of hydroelectric power peaking and stranding kills of salmon fry on the Skagit River has been examined periodically in cooperative studies involving Seattle City Light, Washington Department of Fisheries aad the University of Washington Fisheries Research Institute since 1969 (Thompson 1970, Phinney 1974, Graybill et al. 1979). The thrust of these studies has been to identify flow manipulation conditions which are least detrimental to Skagit River populations of salmon fry. The early studies (Thompson 1970) demonstrated that reduction in flow at Gorge Dam from greater than 5, 000 efs to 1 , 1 00 efs stranded many more fry than did reduction from greater than 5,000 cfs to 2,500 cfs. During Thompson's study the reduction in flow was accomplished it1 a matter of miDutes. The thrust of Phinney's study was to determine if reducing the rate of flow reduction to 400 cfs per 6 minutes would significantly reduce the loss of salmon try due to stranditlg. The modified down-ramping rate still resulted iD substantial try mortality particularly when the flow was reduced to about 1, 000 cfs at Gorge powerhouse. The relationship between ramping rates rangitlg from 357 to 2,757 cfs/hr aDd fry straDding mortality was investigated at three sites along the Skagit River. The relationship appeared very weak until the additional variable of daylight during the dowaramping period was examined and factored into the analysis. The inclusion of the daylight data in the form of a time factor accounted for a significant portion of the variability in strandiDg observed at the Marblemount and Rockport study :sites. There is an interaction between daylight and downramping which needs further evaluation to determine how to 156 coordinate downramping ~ate With the occurrence of daylight to minimize stranding mortality. The tendency of salmon fry stranding to increase from one site to the next moving downstream independent of ramp rate was apparently not associated with salmon fry density because the Marblemount site had the highest densities and was generally intermediate in stranding. The trend may be a function of the physical characteristics of the study sites such as substrate composition and gravel bar gradient. However, the observatioa and analysis of the time data indicates that the time factor is at least partially responsible. The time lag in flow reductions as the now change proceeds downstream results in an increase in occurrence of downramping during daylight hours as the distance downstream from Mewbalem increases. Downramping rate has in the past been considered one of the major factors responsible for fry stranding mortality and-consequently analysis has focused on developing a stranding-downramping relationship. As a result of recent fry stranding studies several other factors thought to influence stranding have emerged. Among these are time of day, tributary inflow, abundance of fry, and substrate. The degree to which some of these factors modified stranding was estimated in the current analytical procedure. Alternative methodologies in evaluating fry stranding mortality might include 1) refinement of the stranding index vs. time factor analysis or 2) stranding index versus habitat. In the first methodology the time factor would represent the time at which the water level (stage) at a given site dropped to a predetermined level that critically impacted the habitat of the fry. The advantages of such a method are that the critical drop in stage may occur prior to the maximum - - 157 dewatering for a given ramp rate and thus low ramp rate requiring many hours for a downramp may be more easily aompared to higher rates. Furthermore, since drop in stage is being evaluated the tributary inflow would be incorporated in the analysis. A second methodology that could directly account for many of these factors might describe stranding as a function of habitat (i.e.; preferred depth, substrate) and also the duration the habitat was available. 'A habitat- stranding relationship could then be evaluated for flow reductions in terms of time of day, rate, etc. Since depth is used in describing the habitat tr~butary inflow would be taken into consideration. The decrease in the incidence of steelhead fry stranding during daylight hours appears opposite to that obtained With salmon. AD explanation of these differences may be found in the behavioral patterns of fry noted during the studies. Steelhead frY in the nearshore areas during daylight hours appear to be easily frightened and readilY leave the area at the slightest disturbance. Large numbers could be obsel"'Ved moving into shallow water as river levels rose each day. These fi.sh would flee at the sight of a per :son approaching the waterts edge. Even the wake fram passing boats caused fry to leave the area for several minutes. This behavior was observed throughout the stranding study. Care had to be taken while electrofishing not to approach the water's edge in the inventory area to avoid scaring the fish away. Considering that steelhead fry normally emerge tram the gravel at times when natural river flows are apt to be dropping may be the reason for what was observed during the stranding study. These fish may be genetically keyed to protect themselves from dropping water levels. The finding of most of the stranded fry near the high water line is possibly explained because the water's edge moved across this area during hours of darkness when visual cues were not as 158 apparent to the fish. This can also explain the scarcity of fish in the nearshore area during a decline in the water level and the tendency to flee at any disturbance. This is supported by the small number of stranded fry found after the daylight downramping. Two factors probably affected the daylight downramp stranding. The river began dropping as soon as it reached high water at Rockport. There may not have been enough time for the fry to establish territories (feeding or spatial) before the flows started to drop. And since this downramp took place completely during daylight, the visual cues were such that the fish avoided stranding. In 1981, steelhead fry became scarce in the nearshore area by the time the mean length of a sample reached ~7 mm. The 1982 observations indicate that while the fry may be present in the nearshore area they appear to be less susceptible to stranding once they reach a length of about 40 mm. Fry growth rates were similar but somewhat slower in 1982. In 1981 on September 9, fry samples from the Marblemount area averaged 40.3 mm in length, while samples from the Rockport area averaged 39.3 mm. In 1982, samples from the same areas averaged 36.0 and 34.9 mm, respectively, on the same date. Average length of steelhead fry taken from the Skagit River at both locations was 39.7 mm in 1981 and 35.6 mm in 1982. This data does not suggest any major differences between 1981 and 1982 as far as when fry are no longer susceptible to stranding. By about the first of October each year fry appear to have grown to the point where their habitat preferences move them from the nearshore areas to deeper water. - 159 8.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 8.1 Escapements, Spawner Distribution and Area Spawned Boat and aerial surveys were conducted by WDF to estimate the Skagit system natural spawning escapements for chinook (summer-fall) pink, chum and coho salmon. The escapement levels of summer-fall chinook, pink and coho sal.alon for 1978-1981 were comparable to those for previous years. A particularly strong high cycle (even-year) escapement was estimated for chum salmon in 1978 (115,200) and a less than average return in 1980 (21,350). As in past years, the moat heavily used section of the mainstem Skagit above the Sauk for summer-fall chinook on a per-mile basis was the section between Diobsud Creek and the Cascade River. The area spawned per river mile.in this seetion as determined from aerial photographs taken on October 6, 1980 was 5,365 m2 and represented approximately 375 redds. Helicopter surveys were conducted by WDG to estimate the Skagit system natural spawning escapements of steelhead trout. The distribution of steelhead spawners per various river section was determined by plotting the locations of the redds on recent aerial photographs. The 1977-1978 to 1981- 1982 spawning periods were the first for which escapement estimates were available, so comparison With previous years was not possible. Steelhead escapement for the IIIBinstem Skagit for these years ranged from 913 to 3, 362. The section of the Skagit mainstem most heavily spawned extended from the Cascade River to the Sauk River. 160 8.2 Adult Soawning Behavior The spawning behavior of female chinook and chum salmon was observed in relation to fluctuating flows. Individual female chinook salmon which had commenced their spawning activity were marked as were redds in the initial stages of construction. During moderate changes in flow females remained at their redds; however, during flow reductions which approached dewatering the females left the redds but returned later at increased flows. Only two redds out of twenty-five marked were judged not to be completed. The general pattern of activity indicated that the female chinook would complete their redds if the flow levels provided adequate flows over the redd site for at least several hours each day. The moderately high and stable flows during the chum observation period precluded establishing any relationship between flow fluctuations and spawning behavior. The 1981 observations of marked redds for both chinook and pink salmon confirmed the 1980 observation that females are forced off redds by flow reductions and return to complete their redds if a reasonable opportunity occurs. 8.3 Instream Incubation Tests . Steelhead eggs were incubated in the Skagit River at several sites to determine temperature unit requirements for emergence. All groups appeared to require approximately 1050 temperature units to reach the button-up stage or development. Chum salmon eggs enclosed in either freezer containers or Witlock-Vibert - 161 boxes were buried in the streambed at various depths and locations to determine the effect of dewatering on egg or alevin survival. Unfortunately, the incubation boxes functioned as sediment traps and the eggs and alevins experienced severe mortality. Correlations between egg and alevin survival and dewatering events therefore were not possible. 8.4 Laboratory Incubation Tests The effects of dewatered or static water conditions on the survival of incubating chinook, coho and chum salmon and steelhead trout eggs and alevins in selected gravel environments were examined. A 9 x 4 factorial design was employed in the first year studies with 5 dewatered or static conditions (0, ~. 8, 16 and 24 hrs (continuous) per day) and !J. gravel sizes (0.33-1.35 em, 0.67-2.67 em, 1.35-5.08 a.., and 0.08-5.08 em) as the environmental variables. In the second year studies a single gravel composition representative of Skagit River substrate was used ~th dewatering timesof 0, 2, 4, 8, 16 and 2~ hrs/day. Eggs were tested from the time of fertilization through hatching. Prehatching survival generally was high for all species, gravel sizes and dewatering. or static regimes tested. Posthatching survival for all species and gravel sizes generally decreased in direct relation to the amo~nt of time dewatered or in static condition. For all speci~s, gravel size and dewatering regimes, at least 50 percent of the alevins had died within a week after hatching. 8.5 Alevin Behavior Studies The alevin behavior studies have shown that salmonid alevins are capable 162 of making downward migrations through some gravel substrates to avoid dewatering. The size of the gravel substrate is directly related to the number of successful migrations with smaller gravel sizes restricting alevin movement. Studies on the effect of velocity on alevin behavior indicated that alevins dispersed randomly when placed in zero velocity flow troughs but remained in the staging area or. were positively rheotaetic if placed in flow tanks with adequate velocity. Dissolved oxygen studies demonstrated that alevins could distinguish between two water sources with high and low dissolved oxygen levels and would migrate toward the higher oxygen source. Alevin photo behavior studies have shown that an initial post-hatching photo \ negativity increased during incubation then reversed sharply to photo positive behavior as time of emergence approached. In all of the preceeding experiments the response time of the alevin decreased as the stage of development increased from post-hatching alevin to pre-emergent fry. 8.6 Fry Stranding the relationship between ramping rates ranging from 357 to 2,757 cfs/hr and salmon fry stranding mortality was investigated at three sites along the Skagit River. The relationship appeared very weak until the additional variable of daylight during the downramping period was examined and factored into the analysis. !he inclusion of the daylight data in the form of a time factor accounted for a significant portion of the variability in stranding observed at the Marblemount and Rockport study sites. !here is an interaction between daylight and downramping which needs further evaluation to determine how to coordinate downramping rate with the occurrence of daylight to minimize stranding mortality. - """·. - 163 Steelhead fry stranding studies evaluated the effects of day vs night downramping on the incidence of stranded fry. The number of stranded fry was significantly less in the daylight test when compared to the nighttime downramping, however, only a limited number of daylight tests were conducted. This may have resulted from insufficient time for the fry to establish territories during the daylight flow regime or an avoidance behavior dependent on daylight conditions. 9.0 RECOMMENDATIONS Efforts to minimize the adverse effects of hydroelectric flow fluctuation in the Skagit River on the salmonid resource can be aided by the development and use of a habitat model that focuses on maintenance of physical habitat • requirements for each salmonid species/life history stage. Specific effects of flow fluctuations on spawning (harrassment), incubation (dewatering), and fry rearing (stranding) have been determined and need to be incorporated into such a habitat model. A model would focus on two basic problems: 1) determination of the minimal annual flow regime required by the mix of salmonid species/life history stages present in the ~iver and 2) the effects of short-term rapid fluctuation in discharge due to hydroelectric peaking on the most sensitive salmonid life stages. The instream flow incremental method (IFIM) bas been developed to deal with the first problem by providing a predictive model of available habitat based on river discharge. The IFIM can be extended to model the second problem, short-term fluctuations to predict various biological responses to short term and cumulative habitat perturbations. It is in this second area that additional research and methods development are required. The specific objectives and tasks required for this model development are outlined as follows: Objective I. A quantitative instream flow analysis of the Skagit River (Newhalem to Rockport) using the instream flow incremental method (IFIM) of analysis to determine the physical habitat and associated flow ~equirements for each salmonid species/life history stage under natural and present power generating regimes is needed. Tasks A. Cross-sectional transect measurements of depth, velocity and B. -c. .... -D. - 165 substrate would be made at low (1500 cfs), medium (3000cfs), and high (6000-7000cfs) discharges at seven study reaches. Low, medium and high flow data sets would be used to calibrate the IFG-4 hydraulic simulation model which would then be used to predict discharges and associated hydraulic parameters within and outside the range of the calibration flows. Habitat suitability criteria: a. Spawning -Criteria for chinook, pink and chum salmon and steelhead trout would be developed using_ previously collected Skagit River data. these criteria would then be compared to published curves tor selection of the final curves to be used in the analysis. b. Incubation -New criteria tor chinook, pink and ehum salmon and steelhead trout which is being developed by Milhous (US FWS- IFG) would be utilized or the assumption made that these criteria are equal to spawning flows. c. Fry -Published values would be relied upon for steelhead trout, none are available for salmon. d. e. Juveniles -Chinook and steelhead published eriteria would be compared to data developed during the fry stranding studies on the Skagit River. Adults -Published values will be applied to steelhead trout. The eamputer program HABTAT would be used to determine the weighted usable area values for each species/life stage utilizing the habitat suitability criteria, over the range of discharges simulated using the depth, velocity and substrate data predieted by the hydraulie model. 166 E. Develop instream flow recommendations for the Skagit River from Newhalem to Rockport using the following steps: a. simulation of a range of discharges at each study reach to determine WUA values for each species/life history stage; b. calculate combined WUA indices for each species/life stage for the Skagit River by extrapolating individual reaches to each associated river segment; c. identify discharges for the various species/life stages on the basis of the peak habitat efficiency values (i.e •• the discharge (QE) associated with the maximum percentage 2f ~ within the wetted perimeter) and the maximum habitat availability values (i.e •• the discharge (~) resulting in the maximum WUA); d. determination of salmonid life stages and species to be given preferential consideration in the development of instream flow recommendations; the preference assigned would be based on numerical abundance. sensitivity to habitat perturbation and critical or limiting periods of life history; ee combine the ~ and QE flow information and stochastic projections of monthly discharge based on historical records to determine minimum flow recommendations for each species/life stage during normal and critical water years; f. recommend comparable alternative minimum and critical water year instream flows for natural and present power generation regimes based on City Light and USGS river gaging records. Objective II. Determine the effects that the rate, frequency and amplitude of flow fluctuation have on chinook, chum and pink salmon and steelhead ''""' - 167 trout incubation habitat. Task a. Task bo Task o. A phenology chart for each species to establish incubation timing, developmental rates, emergence and emigration periods would be developed from existing data. Hourly discharge data for each developmental period would be examined under natural and two selected post-operational discharge per,iod.s. Re.sult.s of the laboratory dewatering and intragravel behavioral studies would be incorporated into an analysis of the calculated and actual incubation habitat affected by dewatering in a time-dependent habitat model. Objective III. Develop a time-dependent habitat model capable or predicting the availability aDd probability of use of juvenile habitat affected by various ramping rate and now duration events. Ta.sk a. Field measurements to develop criteria relevant to try stranding (i.e., beach slope, hydraulic gradient, depth, velocity, substrate, time of day and try abundance) would be made during the chinook and steelhead try stranding studies. Task b. A survey of the number or representative stranding bars would be made from Mewhalem to Rockport to determine the relationship of the sample fry stranding bars to the entire river channel. Objective IV. Determine the intragravel survival, movement, and behavior of salmonid alevins in response to variations in velocity, dissolved oxygen and metabolic wastes resulting from flow fluctuations. Additional research on this topic is required because the results have not been sufficiently developed for incorporation in the model. . Task A. The occurrence of intragravel movement of salmonid alevins under 168 conditions of adequate velocity, di~~olved oxygen, low metabolic wastes and darkne~s would be determined. B. The level of water velocity that would stimulate movement of alevins would be established and determination of whether or not the movement is random or-demonstrated a positive or negative rheotactic response made. C. The ability of alevins to make downward intragravel migrations to avoid dewatering would be tested using different dewatering rates and substrate sizes. D. The survival and movement of alevins in response to various levels of dissolved oxygen and metabolic waste would be recorded. E. The direction and magnitude of photoresponse of alevins would be established. F. The influence of the· developmental stage of an alevin in altering its response to the preceding environmental stimuli would be determined. ·_; - - - 169 10.0 LITERATURE CITED Alderdice. D. R •• W. P. Wickett and J. R. Brett. 1968. Some effects of temporary exposure to low dissolved oxygen levels on Pacific salmon eggs. J. Fhh. Res. Board Can. 15(2) :229-250. Bams. R. A. 1969. Adaptations of sockeye salmon associated with incubation in stream gravels. Pages 71-87 ~ T. G. Northcote. ed., Symposium on Salmon and Trout in Streams. H. R~ MacMillan Lectures in Fisheries. Univ. of British Columbia, Vancouver. Bauersfeld, K. 1977. Effects of peaking (stranding) of Columbia River dams on juvenile anadromous fishes below The Dalles Dam, 197~ and 1975. Wash. Dept. Fish. Tech. Rept. No. 31. 117 p. Bauersfeld, K. 1978. Stranding of juvenile salmon by flow reductions at Mayfield Damon the Cowlitz River, 1976. Wash. Dept. Fish. Tech. Rept. Mo. 35. 36 p. Becker, c. D., D. A. Ieitzel, and D. H. Fickeisen. 1982. Effects of dewatering on chinook salmon redds: Tolerance of four developmental phases to daily dewaterings. Trans • .Am. Fish. Soc. 111:624-637. Becker, C. D., D. H. Fickeisen and J. c. Montgomery. 1981. Assessment of impacts from water level fluctuations on fish in the Hanford Reach, Columbia River. Battelle, PNL-3813. UC-97e, 53 p. Beschta. R. L., and W. L. Jackson. 1979. the intrusion of fine sediments into a stable gravel bed. J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 36:20~210. Bishai, H. M. 1960. the effect of water currents on the survival and distribution of fish larvae. J. Cons. Cons. Perma. Int. Explor. Mer. 25: 13~1~6. Bjornn, T. c. 1969. Embryo survival and emergence studies. Job No. 5 170 Federal aid in fish and wildlife restoration job completion rep. Project F-49-R-7. Idaho Fish Game Dept. 17 pp. Brannon, E. L. 1965. The influence of physical factors on the development and weight of sockeye salmon embryos and alevins. Int. Pac. Salmon Fish. Comm. Progr. Rep. No. 12. 26 pp. Burrows, R. E •. 1964. Effects of excretory products on hatchery-reared salmonids. u.s. Fish and Wildlife Service, Research Report 66. 12 pp. Carey, W. E., and D. I.. G. Noakes. 1981. Development of photobehavioral responses in young rainbow trout, ~ gairdneri Richardson. J. Fish Biol. 19:285-296. Chapman, D. w. 1962. Aggressive behavior in juvenile coho salmon as a cause of emigration. J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 19:1047-1080. Coble, D. W. 1961. Influence of water exchange and dissolved oxygen in redds on survival of steelhead trout embryos. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 90(4):469- 474. Crisp, D. T. 1981. Effects of flow regime on the young stages of salmonid fishes. Report to Natural Environment Council, England. 20 pp. Davis, J. C. 1975. Minimal Dissolved Oxygen Requirements of Aquatic Life with Emphasis on Canadian Species: A Review. J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 32:2295-2332. . Dill, L. M., and T. G. Northcote. 1969. Effects of gravel size, egg depth, and egg density on intragravel movement and emergence of coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) alevins. J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 27:1191-1199. Dill, P. A. 1977. Development of behavior in alevins of Atlantic salmon (~ salar), and rainbow trout (~. gairdneri). Anim. Behav. 25:116- 121. Fast, D. E., Q. J. Stober, s. C. Crumley and E. S. Killebrew. 1981. Survival - - - I~ 171 and movement of chinook and coho alevins in hypoxic environments. In E. L. Brannon {ed.), Salmon and Trout migratory behavior symposi~. Univ. Washington, College of Fisheries, Seattle (manuscript). Graybill, J. P., R. L. Burgner, J. c. Gislason, P. E. Huffman, K. H. Wyman, R. G. Gibbons, K. W. Kurko, Q. J. Stober, T. W. Fagnan, A. P. Stayman and D. M. Eggers. 1979. Assessment of the reservoir-related effects of the Skagit River project on downstream fishery resources of the Skagit River, Washington. Final Report to Seattle City Light. Uni v. Washington. Fish. Res. Inst. FRI-UW-7905. 602 pp. Gray, J. 1928. The growth of fish. II. The growth-rate of the embryo of Salmon ~· J. Exp. Biol. 6: 11Q-124. Hall, J. D., and R. L. Lantz. 1969. Effects of logging on the habitat of coho salmon and cutthroat trout in coastal streams. Pages 355-375. In T-.. G .. Hortbcote (ed.), Symposium on Salmon and Trout in Streams. H. R. MacMillan Lecture in Fisheries. Univ. B.C., Vancouver. Hardy, C. J. 1963. An examination of eleven stranded redds of brown trout (~ trutta), excavated in the Selwyn River during July and August, 1960. H. z. Jour. Sci. 6:107-119. Hausle, D. A., and D. W. Coble. 1976. Influence of sand in redds on survival and emergence of brook trout. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 105-(1):57-63. Hawke, S. P. 1978. Stranded redds of quinnat salmon in the Mathias River, South Island, New Zealand. N.Z. Jour. of Mar. and Fresh. Res. 12(2):167- 171. Hayes, R. R., I. R. Wilmot and D. A. Livingstone. 1951. The oxygen oosumption of the salmon egg in relation to development and activity. J. Exp. Zool. 116:377-395. Hickey, P. L., w. K. Hershberger and J. N. Dong. 1979. Hatching table for 172 fisheries research. The Progr. Fish.-Cult. 41(1):25-26. Hoar, W. S. 1968. The evolution of migratory behavior among juvenile salmon of the genus Oncorhynchus. J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 15:391-428. Hobbs, D. F. 1937. Natural reproduction of quinnat salmon, brown and rainbow trout in certain New Zealand waters. New Zealand Marine.Dept. Fish. Bull. No. 6, 104 p. KOski, K. V. 1966. The survival of coho (Oncorhynchus kisutch) from egg deposition to emergence in three Oregon coastal streams. M. S. Thesis, Oregon State Univ., Corvallis. 84 pp. Koski,-K. V. 1975. The survival and fitness of two stocks of chum salmon (Oncorhynchus keta) from egg deposition to emergence in a controlled- stream environment at Big Beef Creek. Ph.D. Dissertation, Univ. Washington, Seattle. 212 pp. Larmoyeux, J. D. and R. G. Piper. 1973. Effects of water reuse on rainbow trout in hatcheries. Prog. Fish-Cult. 35:2-8. Mason, J. C. 1976. Some features of coho salmon Oncorhynchus kisutch fry emerging from simulated redds, and concurrent changes in photobehavior. Fish. Bull. 74:167-175. Mason, J. C. 1969. Hypaxial stress prior to emergence and competition among coho salmon fry. J •. Fish. Res. Board Can. 26:63-91. Mason, J. C. and D. W. Chapman. 1965. Significance of early emergence, environmental rearing capacity, and behavioral ecology of juvenile coho salmon in stream channels. J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 24:375-428. McCuddin, M. E. 1977. Survival of salmon and trout embryos and fry in gravel-sand mixtures. M.S. Thesis, Univ. Idaho, Moscow. 30 p. McNeil, W. J. and W. H. Ahnell. 1964. Success of pink salmon spawning relative to size of spawning bed materials. u.s. Fish and Wildl. Serv. 173 Spec. Sci. Rep. Fish. No. 469. 15 p. Neave, F. 1955. Notes on the seward migration of pink and chum salmon fry. J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 12:369-37~. Neitzel, D. A., D. H. Fickeison, and C. D. Becker. 1981. Relative tolerance of four intergravel developmental stages of chinook salmon to dewatering. Hikiforou, N. D. 1952. Growth and respiration of young salmon at various concentrations of oxygen in water. (in Russian) Doklady Akademii Nauk s.s.s.R. 86:1231~1232. Ottaway, E. M. ~ and A. Clarke. 1981. A. preliminary investigation into the -vulnerability of young trout (Sal~ trutta L.) and Atlantic salmon (~. ~ L.) to downstream displacement by high water velocities. J. Fish Biol. 19:135-145. Phillips, R. W., R. L. Lantz, E. W. Claire, and J. R. Moring. 1975. Some effects of gravel mixtures on emergence of coho salmon and steelhead trout fry. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 104(3):461-466. Phinney, L. A. 1974. Further observations on juvenile salmon stranding in the Skagit River, March 1973. Unpubl. MS., Wash. Dept. Fish., 34 p. Reiser, D. W. and T. c. Bjornn. 1979. Habitat requirements of anadromous salmonids. U.S. Dept. Ag. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-96. 54 p. Reiser, D. w., and R. G. White. 1981. Effects of now fluctuation and redd dewatering on salmonid embryo development and fry quality. Res. Tech. Completion Report, Idaho Water and Energy Resources Research Institute. 86 pp. Roth, H. and Geiger, W. 1963. Experimentelle Untersuchungen uber das Verhalten der Backforellenbrut in der Laichgrube. Z. Hydrobiol. 25:202- 218. Sharmardina, I. P. 1954. Changes in the respiratory rate of fishes in the 174 course of their development. Dolk. Akad. Nauk. S.S.S.R. 98:689-692. Shumway, D. L., C. E. Warren and P. Doudoroff. 1964. Influence of oxygen concentration and water movement on the growth of steelhead trout and coho salmon embryos. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 93:342-356. Silver, s. J., C. E. Warren and P. Doudoroff. 1963. Dissolved oxygen requirements of developing steelhead trout and chinook salmon embryos at different water velocities. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 92:327-343. Stober, Q. J., S. C. Crumley, D. E. Fast, E. S. Killebrew, and R. M. Woodin. 1981. The effects of hydroelectric discharge fluctuations on salmon and steelhead survival in the Skagit River, Washington. Annual Progress Report to Seattle City Light. Univ. Washington, Fish. Res. Inst. FRI-UW- 8127. 211 pp. Stuart, T. A. 1953. Spawning migration, reproduction and young stages of the Loch trout (~. trutta L.) Freshwater Salm. Fish. Res. 5:0-39. Thomas, A. E., J. L. Banks, and 0. c. Greenland. 1969. Effects of yolk sac absorption on the swimming ability of fall chinook salmon. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 98:406-410. Thompson, J. S. 1970. The effect of water regulation at Gorge Dam on stranding of salmon fry in the Skagit River, 1969-1970. Unpubl. MS. Wash. Dept. Fish. 46 p. White, G. M. 1915. The behavior of brook trout embryos from the time of hatching to the absorption or the yolk sac. J. Anim. Behav. 5:44-60. Wickett, W. P. 1958. Review of certain environmental factors affecting the production of pink and chum salmon. J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 15:1103- 1126~ Woodhead, P. M. J. 1957. Reactions of salmonid larvae to light. J. Exp. Biol. 34:402-416. J r 175 ll.O APPENDICES - - .. SKRGI T R. AT NEWHRLEM -JANUARY 1980 SUNDAY t16NOAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY SATURDAY ~I I ~~~· V= 1-~ =·~ 1 2 3 4 5 1-~I , I ~ ~ I t I w I w lJ.... :z 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ....... ~~~, ~~~ I ~-I I~ I 1-a ....... w :c 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ~ ~ I ~I ~ I I /~I ffi 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 ~----1 t ,~ I 27 28 29 30 31 Appendix I. F~gure 1. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Newhalem (USGS). January- December • 1980 • l :+o 1-' '-I ()\ ] --~ -1 SKAGIT R. AT NEWHRLEM -FEBRUARY 1980 SUNDAY twNOOY TUESDAY WEONESORY THURSDAY fRIDAY SATURDAY ~ I I I I I I ~~ 1 2 t-~~-~"-~ IL I I ~/ IV I w w l.L. z 80 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1--4 ~~~Q, I y ~ I I I I I -d 1-' "'-- 1--'-'I ~ 5 1--4 w :r: 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ~ ~==Et I~ I~ I I ~~ ffi 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ~I·~~=~~ ~F~ I 24 25 26 27 28 Appendix I. Figure 1. Hourly gage height,data for Skagit River at Newha1em (USGS). January- December 1980 (continued). SKAGIT R Q AT NEW HAL EM -MRRCH 1980 SUNO~Y HONOAY TUfSOfiY WEDNESDAY THUftSOfiY fRIDAY SATURDAY ~ I I ), c:::. 1 ~ I ~+=1 ~···· . I r-w z [_ w LL :z 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ._.. ~~~ ~ 1-~ ~ ~I 7~.-L I r- ~ ._.. w :I: 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ~ ~~J I ~~~-~-I I ~ 8i l. ""' ' v- 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 ~\ E~~~~ I I j r-........ ./ 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 :1 a l~r-I I I I I I 82SJ _Jill -- 30 3~ Appendix I, Figure 1. llour1y gage height data for Skagit River at Newha1em (USGS), January- December 1980 (continued). 1 - ...... --.j CXl } ] ·-l J SKAGIT R ., AT NEWHALEM -APRIL 1980 SUNDAY t11lNDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY fRIDAY SATl.JRDAY ~ I~ I I ~· ~ ~ \.. 7 1 2 3 4 5 ~~:;=~~~1 ~~ *~ ~ j 1-w w lL z. 80 6 7 8 9 10 1'1 12 ........ ~I' ~ ~ ~~ 123~~ ~==~~ 1-I-' ~ ...... "\D ........ w :c 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ~ ~~' I I I I I I ffi - 80 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 ~ I I~-~~-I I I I 27 28 29 30 Appendix I, Figure 1. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Newbalem (USGS), January- December 1980 (continued). . I SKAGIT R ... AT NEWHALEM -MRY 1980 SUNDAY HONOAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY fRlDRY SATURDAY ~ I I I I ~ I 1 2 3 ~'=-I ~~*~~-.4. I t-w w LL :z 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ....... ~ ~-~ I ~$v=~a I I I t-a c ....... w :X: 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ~ ~ I $~~-~~~t"' I =4~ I ffi 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ~ ~?1 r ±4;=§~~~-I ~ . [ I lllllfC:3Q 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Appendix I. Figure 1. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Newhalem (USGS), January- December 1980 (continued). 1-' CXl 0 ] .. ] SKAGIT R~ AT NEWHRLEM -JUNE .1980 BUNOAY HONOAY TUESDAY WEONESORY THURSDAY fRIDAY SATURDAY ~I l~~.ll ·10 J~l I;;JJ 1 2 l 4 j 6 7 ~l;:z I I I I I I I ~ 29 30 Appendix I. Figure 1. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Newhalem (USGS), January- Deceniber 1980 (continued). 1 SKAGIT R" RT NEWHRLEM -JULY 1980 SUNDAY 110NDAY TIJESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSORY , fRIDAY SATURDAY ~I I I ~ I ~ I ·j 01:: 1 2 3 4 5 ~~~ I I= I b~ 7=§ t-w • w LL. :z 80 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 t-4 ~I== I I t t I I~ j t- ~ - t-4 w ::c 80 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ~ ~~-~ I J I I=-+-~ I ffi 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 ~I I ~sL~~ 27 28 29 30 31 Appendix I, Figure 1. Hourly g~ge height data for Skagit River at Newhalem (USGS). January- December 1980 (co~tinued). "..... :·":!: I-' CXl N 1 SKAGIT R. AT NEWHALEM -AUGUST 1980 8UNOAY HOHORY Tl£60AY WEDNESDAY TtlJR60RY FRIDRY SATURDAY ~ ·I I I I ~~~ l 1 2 ~ I ·~ ~~ I~ I~~ ~ l-w z w 7 -.. IJ._ z 3 4 .5 6 7 8 9 ~ ~· ~I I I ~ I ~/ I l-a I-' 00 ~ w w :c 10 11 12 13 14 1.5 16 ~ ~S2 , I I I I I= ~ ~ 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ~I I .: I~ ~~~~-~ ~~ 7 c;;;;;;:> 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 ~~--·~ I I I I I I . ----31 Appendix I, Figure 1. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Newhalem (USGS), January- December 1980 (continued), l-w w LL z t--1 t--1 w I SKAGIT R. RT NEWHALEM -OCTOBER 1980 SUNDAY HONOAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THUR50AY fR IOAY SATURDAY ~lt----t-t---1--t-1=--=---~42+-::==:::; ~&s~J ------~~ 26 27 28 29 30 31 Appendix I. Figure 1. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Newhalem (USGS). January- December 1980 (continued). SKAGIT R. AT NEWHRLEM -NOVEMBER 1980 SUNDAY HONOAY TUESDAY WEONESOOY Tttfl50RY fRIDAY 5ATlflOAY ~ I I I I I I~ 1 30 Appendix I, Figure 1. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Newhale~ (USGS), January- December 1980 (continued). 1-w ~ z .......... .......... w :c I I SKAGIT R. RT NEWHRLEM -DECEMBER 1980 SUNDAY TUESDAY WEONEBOAY Ttl.fiSOAY FRIDAY 6RTUROOY 1 2 3 4 5 6 ~ I I I I 8?3 fJ 7 8 . 9 10 11 12 ~ 1i?4= i-' $#I '=I -g ~IJ 1~t u I ~ I 16 I _, 17 I Lg-19 _1 22 23 24 25 26 20 21 I , I~ l I I I I 27 28 29 30 31 Appendix I, Figure 1. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Ne¥ha1em (USGS), January- December 1980 (continued). SKAGIT R--AT MARBLEMOUNT -JANUARY SlNJRY ttONOf\Y WESORY l£0NESORY Ttl.IRSOAY fftllllY SATURDAY '! I I I I I I 1 2 3 4 5 'l I I I I I' I l-w UJ lL z 6 1 8 9 10 11 12 t-f 'l I I I I I I l- ~ ~ w I 13 14 15 '16 11 18 19 ~ 'j I I ~ I I 71 I ~ 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 'l ...:::: I ~~ ~ ·~ I I I 27 28 29 30 31· Appendix I, Figure 2. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS). January-December 1980. 1980 I I I 1 I ~ 00 ....... -. !I SKAGIT R. AT MARBLEMOUNT -FEBRUARY 1980 SUNOAY tum'( TUESORY &£0NESOAY Ttl.lftSOOY fRIDAY SflTURDAY '! I I I I I ...........- 1 2 '!~-I~ ~1-I I I~ I ~ ~~ I ..... w w IJ_ z 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1-' 1-f '! ~ I I I I ·I J co 00 ..... 2i ..... ......... w :::r: 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ~ ·~I ~~ I I I I ~ ~ ffi 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 . ·~~~~==I r-~ ~~~ I t 24 25 26 27 28 29 Appendix I. Figure 2. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS). January-December 1980 (continued), SKAGIT R. AT MARBLEMOUNT -MARCH 1980 SUNDAY tomY TUESDAY HEDNE5DAY THURSDAY fRIDAY SATURDAY 'l I I I I I I I 1 ·~ I ~C>ei $t4$J I -I l-w w lJ_ £ " I z 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1--i '!I ~ I ~ I: I I I l- ~ ...... ()0,,, < == .c-1.0 1--i w J: 9 10 11 12 ll 14 15 "~ ·~ I~ l~c I H= I I o= I q g v:-=:=> -,.......,_...... :::...c: - I 16 11 18 19 20 21 22 'l-; ~~ ~ I ·.~ I I I - 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 'j; I I I I I I I ._..&::. .c:: 30 31 Appendix I, Figure 2. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS), January-December 1980 (continued). t, I ' ' SKAGIT R~ AT MARBLEMOUNT -APRIL 1980 SUNDAY ·. HONOAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSOAY fRIDAY SATURDAY 'jl I I~ I I ~ J 1 2 3 4 5 '! I=· I I -I ~-I= -~ I I--w w l.J.._ -~ - z 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 t-t l I~ ~· I ~ ~~ ~ I 1--1-' : 1.0 a 0 ......... w :c 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 u ~.· .. I I ~ ;1-I I I I ffi 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 '! I I ~ I I I I 27 28 29 30 Appendix I, Figure 2. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS), January-December 1980 (continued). .: -J J l . J SKAGIT R. AT MARBLEMOUNT -MAY 1980 StiiDAY tDIJAY Tl£SOAY WEONESOAY TtlJRSOAY fRIDAY SATURDAY '! I I I I I I I 1 2 3 '! I -I I=§ ~ I I l-w w IJ_ = z 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ....... '! I . I I I I I I l-tO a .. ...... ...... w :c 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ~ '! I I I I I I I ~ 18 19 20 21 22 2l 24 '! I I I I I I I 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Appendix 1 1 Figure '2. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS). January-December 1980 (continued). t-a ........ w .:::C SKAGIT ·~I ·~, '! u II ., & a I SUNDAY· 1 8 15 22 R. AT mHDAY I I 2 I I 9'. I I 16 23 MARBLEMOUNT -JUNE 1980 TUESDAY WEDNESDAY TlfJRSOAY FRIDAY SATURDAY I I 3 4 5 6 7 I ~ : -~ , -10 11 12 13 14 I I 17 18 19 20 21 24 25 26 27 28 '!1~------~----+-----+----+------t----+------1 29 30 Appendix I. Figure 2. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS). January-December 1980 (continued). ' -t ..... \0 N ] . ~ l . ] . SKAGIT R. AT MARBLEMOUNT -AUGUST 1980 BUHOfiY tiONOAY TUE60RY WfDHESORY TttJRBDAY fft!ORY 6AMOAY '!I I I I I I I 1 2 'j I I I I I I I ._ w w lJ... z 3 4 s 6 7 8 9 ~ 'j I I I I: I I~ I ._ a ~ ..... w \0 ::c 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 w ~ 'j~ ~ I I I : I ~-J ~ = 11 18 19 20 21 22 23 'j I : 1-~ ~ I ::[§ ; I I . I 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 l~ ~ I ~ I I I I I 31 Appendix I, Figure 2. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS), January-December 1980 (continued). SKAGIT R. AT MARBLEMOUNT -SEPTEMBER 1980 BtHJRY tOIDRY TUESDAY WEDHEBORY TtlJR6DAY fRIDAY SRTURf.lAY ·~ 1-~ I I I ~I I - 1 2 3 4 5 6 ·~ , tl I=-t I bJ 15 =I 1--. W' w lJ.... :: .._ r l ------. ·-· z 1 8 9 10 11 12 13 ....... ·~ I _J I I JiiA4 J I-I-' 1.0 5 p. ....... ::: 7 = "' w :I: 14 15 16 11 18 19 20 ~ 'lt I I I I I ,I I ffi .... .. ......, 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 'll I ,. j j ru I I I 28 29 30 Appendix I, Figure 2. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS)1 January-December 1980 (continued). -, '-.. -,~ SKAGIT R. AT MARBLEMOUNT -OCTOBER 1980 5lHlAY tumY TUESDAY WEDNESOOY Ttl.fi6DAY fftiOOY 6RTUQ\Y 'l I I L J2 I= ~ I 1 2 3 4 'l I I J E-WJ;; ! l t-w w u.. A-7 z 5 6 1 8 9 10 11 ....... 'l j E -1== lm• I -1 8 1--1-' 'Ll ~ ln t-f ? -w ::t: 12 13 14 15 16 11 18 ~ 'l ~~ I I I ~ I I I ffi 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 'l I ~ I I I ~ I 26 27 28 29 30 31 Appendix 1 1 Figure 2. llourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS). January-December 1980 (continued). SKAGIT R. AT MARBLEMOUNT -NOVEMBER 1980 BlHlRY tKHJAY TUESDAY t£(H:SOAY TtliUiOOY fRIOOY SEITmooY '! I I I I I I I 1 '! I I I I I I I 1-w l1J La... z 2 3 4 5 6 7 . 8 t-4 '! I I I I I I I I-a t-4 t-' l1J \0 Q\ :c 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ~ '! I I I I I I I ffi 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 '! I I I I I ,... I I 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 '! I I I I I I I 30 Appendix I, Figure 2. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS). January-December 1980 (continued). SKAGIT R. AT MARBLEMOUNT -DECEMBER 1980 Sl.tlllY tDOlY TlE&mY WEOOESOOY TtUUQIY fRIOOY 6RTUIDAY '! I I I I I I I 1 2 3 4 5 6 "I I I I I I I I t-w lt! L ' :z 1 8 9 10 11 12 13 ..... '! I ~ I ~ I I J t-1-' ~ ~ ~ -1 ....... w ::r: 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ~ 'f -~ ~~-·1 I I ~~7/ I I ~ ,. co::::: 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 '! I. I I I I I I 28 29 30 31 . Appendix I, Figure 2. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS), January-December 1980 (continued). SKAGIT R. AT NEWHALEM -JANUARY 1981 SltllAY HotllAY TUESDAY WEDNESOAY TtUSOAY fRIIlflY ~TURDfiY ~ I I I 1~31=51 4 1 2 3 ~ Jf4\tz~~J 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Appendix I, Figure 3. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Newha1em (USGS), January- December 1981. . -) SKAGIT R. AT NEWHALEM -FEBRUARY 1981 BltiDAY mtllftY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY T~BDAY fRIDAY 8RTUftllRY ~ I I ~I ~I I I A A- l 2 3 4 5 6 7 ~ I tsdk' l;vt =I I ~ w w = lL I-' 1.0 z 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1.0 t-1 ~I I P44f±?flc I I ~I ~ ~ ...... w :c 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ~ ~~ ;I ·~ I ~ I ~ I ~ ~ .c. 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Appendix I, Figure 3. Uour1y gage height data for Skagit River at Newhalem (USGS), January- December 1981 (continued). SKAGIT R. AT NEWHRLEM -APRIL 1981 6UNORY tkltllfiY TUESDAY WEIH:SOAY TtlJftSORY fRIDAY 6AMDAY ~ I I I ~ I -j I ,I r' I 1 2 3 4 ~~~ ~ ~ I ·=t =~ =I ~ t-w ~ z 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ...... ~-=f I I I I~OEf¥] N J-0 i3 -0 'I: '1' ...... w :I: 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 ~ ~ ~ ; I I~ I ~ I I fB " ........., 7 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ~ -I 1 ~ I "' ~ I~ I I ' 26 27 28 29 30 Appendix I, Figure 3. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Newhalem (USGS), January- December 1981 (continued) . l } ' l. ~ J I · . l } SKAGIT R. AT NEWHRLEM -MAY 1981 SUtDW tDilflY TUESDAY' I£00ESORY THURSDAY fRIDAY SATUftllAY ~ I I I I I~~ 1 2 I ~ ~ I=~ I I ~ ~ =~ l-w w ~ .::::::.. lL z 3 . 4 5 6 1 8 9 1-1 ~ p I -A·I I --~l ~ I d l-~ ~ :.. ........ w :r: 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ~ ~ -I =I ~ ~34§¥ 4 d ffi Q 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ~ (~~§ -~=I ~I ~QI 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 ·~ ~ I I I I I I 31 Appendix I, Figure 3. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Newbalem (USGS), January- December 1981 (continued). N 0 ,..... 1-w w lL z 88 88 84 82 80 88 88 84 82 80 t--t 88 I-86 ~ 84 t-1 82 w 80 :c SKAGIT RA AT NEWHALEM SUNDAY tuHJAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY I' /'.-.._ ~ / -....._ 7 ~~ ---- f--.J 1 2 3 lt ~'-"' -"'' "'""'" ./ - 7 8 9 10 11 ~ I~"-----~ 14 1S 16 17 18 ~ · ~ I I ,_1 21 22 23 I 24 25 I 28 JUNE 1981 fRIOflY SATURDAY -"'" ........... f'-./ I--' '-....r ) b 1'-F ....._._ ..r---"1 ...., 12 lJ 19 20 l... f v I ~~ 26 27 I I Appendix I Figure 3. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Newha1em (USGS). January-December 1981 (Continued). N 0 N t---i w I 88 88 84 82 80 SKAGIT R. AT NEWHRLEM SUNDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY c, _...... ~ T 2 8 9 JULY 1981 FRIDAY SATURDAY ] 4 10 li F :tf· I ±±1 80 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 88 88 8t 82 80 .... -...__,. 19 .,... A/ _.-f ~ '-' 2(f ll ,... '\.. '-~ v .../ 22 23 2 4 25 ~~C=:\~Fr ~-1 ~f¥1 ~:;o;:; ~1 ::~1 ~~j ----~ 26 27 28 29 30 ll Appendix I Figure 3. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Newha1em (USGS). January-December 1?81 (Continued). N 0 w 1--w w IJ_ z; ....... 1- ~ ....... w :c SKAGIT RQ AT NEWHALEM -AUGUST 1981 88 flO 84 8Z 80 SUNDAY HONOAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY fRIDAY SATURDAY l 13 14 15 Appendix I Figure 3. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Newha1em (USGS) • January-December 1981 (Continued). N 0 .1:- SKAGIT R. AT NEWHALEM -SEPTEMBER 1981 SUNDAY tulNOAY · TUESDAY WEDNESDAY TttURSDAY fRIDAY SATURDAY ~ I I I I~ I~ ~ 1 ., I 1 2 l 4 5 ~~ I /I I 44:: I= t I t-w w l.J._ eo. z. 6 7 8 9 10 ll 12 1-4 ~ I -1 ~ I I· 'I , I t- ~ N __, 0 1-4 7 VI w :r: 13 14 . 15 16 17 18 19 ~ ~ I ~ ~~=~I ~I d ffi ~ I" 1 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 ~~ I I I I I I 27 28 29 30 Appendix I Figure 3. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Newha1em (USGS), January-December 1981 (Continued). SKAGIT R A AT NEWHRLEM -OCTOBER 1981 SUNDAY tiONOAY TUESDAY HEONE60AY THURSDAY fRIDAY SATURDAY t-w w LL.. f- 5 .......... w :c ~ ~ 88 84 82 80 4 11 I I 5 12 I I IV 1 7 =:::1~1 6 7 l1 14 ~I =I k6k4dP?d I ~ '~I 1 2 \ 3 =~ I 8 9 10 15 lb ll 80 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ~I I l¥dr=J 25 26 27 28 29 30 ll Appendix I Figure 3. llourly gage height data for Skagit River at Newha1em (USGS), January-December 1981 (Continued). ; I I N 0 0'1 ) ' l SKAGIT R. AT NEWHALEM -NOVEMBER 1981 SUNDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY · fRIDAY SATUROOY 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ~ I I I I I ~ ~ l--w w LL z 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 t-t ~I, ~ I I I ~ I I N 1-0 t5 gl r-''i ........ w ::r: 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ~ ~ I ~ I ~ I g I gj 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ~ j; I I I I I I " 29 30 Appendix I Figure 3. llourly gage height data for Skagit River at Newha1em (USGS). January-December 1981 (Continued). SKAGIT RQ AT NEWHRLEM -DECEMBER 1981 .._ w w LL z ....... .._ a ....... w ::c ~ ~ SUNDAY 88 88 IU 82 80 ~ 6 =I= 82 = 80 13 ~I= 80 20 rl ~ I ~~~ ~ 27 Appendix I. Figure 3, tiONOflY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY fRIDAY SATURDAY ~ L ""' "-' 1 2 3 4 5 7 -7 I ~ 7 8 9 10 11 12' () I ~ I I I J 14 . 15 16 17 18 19 ~I I ~ * $ I 21 22 23 24 25 26 I ~ ~ I ~ I I 28 29 30 31 Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Newhalem (USGS). January-December 1981 (Continued). N 0 00 SKAGIT 'l u & 7 5 8 l SUNDAY 4 R. AT 110NORY 5 . 1 ... ) MARBLEMOUNT -JANUARY 1981 TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY fRIDAY SATURDAY 1 2 3 6 1 8 9 10 ....... w :c !~------+------4------~------+------4------~------4 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 u 8 7 6 8 1 18 19 20 ~1 22-23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Appendix I, Figure 4. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS), January -December 1981. N 0 \0 .SKAGIT R .. AT MARBLEMOUNT MARCH 1981 SUNDAY ttONOAY TUESDAY WEONESOAY THURSDAY fRIDAY SATURDAY J-w w lL z I-f 1-f w :r: 'll ll 8 ., 5 3 1 '! u 8 ., 5 3 . 1 It 8 ., & 3 l 1 2 8 !I ~ 15 16 22 23 29 ]0 I ~ 3 4 5 6 A 10 11 12 1.1 ·~ I 17 18 19 20 - 24 25 26 27 n Appendix I, Figure 4. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS) January -December 1981. (Continued). 7 . 14 21 28 N ...... 0 ] . SKAGIT R. AT MARBLEMOUNT FEBRUARY 1981 Sl.JNOAY · mNOAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THUR60RY fR IOAY 5ATLROAY ~ w :c u a 1 5 3 l 11 a , 5 3 l '! '!I 1 8 lS I f 22 2 3 ~ 9 10 =I t 16 17 p I 23 24 -4 s 6 7 ·----- 11 12 1l 14 I 21 : I r I 18 19 20 I I I 25 26 27 28 Appendix I, Figure 4. Hourly gage heigbt.data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS), January-December 1981. (Continued). J I ,,, N ...... ..... 1-w w I.J_ z ....... I-- 25 t-f w :c ~ ffi SKAGIT R. AT NEWHALEM -MARCH 1981 88 88 84 82 80 SUNDAY 1 ~ ' ' 8 I ~~~ 15 ~ I 22 ~ ~ I 29 2 ~ 9 16 ~ 23 30 TUE600Y WEONE60AY TtJJRSOfiY fftiDAY 6RTUROAY __.,.. ....___........ ~--- 3 4 5 b I I ~ -I ~ I ~I ~ 10 11 12 13 14 ,I ~ I ~= I~ I ~ 17 18 19 20 21 I~ ~7 I~ t I ~ L .t. 24 25 26 27 28 ~ I I I I I 31 Appendix I. Figure 4. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS). January -December 1981. (Cont:lnued). ., N 1-' N . l t-w w La.... z t-i t-a ~ w :c ~ ~ l SKAGIT R. AT MARBLEMOUNT -APRIL 1981 u a , 5 3 I 'j 'il '! '! SUNDAY I 5 ~I 12 I 19 I 26 ......: I 6 =I 13 ,. I 20 I 27 TUESDAY WEONEBDAY THURBmY FRIDAY SATURDAY 1 2 . 3 4 I ~ I~ I I 1 8 9 10 11 I I I ;~ I ;; 4 14 15 16 17 18 . I -I I~ = ~ I I 21 22 23 24 25 = ~·: I ~ I I 28 29 30 Appendix I, Figure 4. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS). January -December 1981. (Continued). ~ ~ SKAGIT R. AT MARBLEMOUNT -MAY 1981 SUNOAY tiONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY SATURDAY ·~ I I I I I ~ I 1 2 'l I 1--I I I I I ~ w ~ ..._ "'' :z 3 4 5 6 7 ,8 9 ....... ·~I I I I I I I d 1- ~ t-f . '!"' N w ' I-' :c 10 1~ 12 13 14 15 16 -"' ~ ·~ I I ~ I ~ I I ~ ~ 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 'il ~= § § I I I I. I 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 l ~ I I I I I I 31 Appendix I, Figure 4. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS), January -December 1981. (Continued). c .. . \ I l ) .. , . ) SKAGIT R. AT MARBLEMOUNT -JUNE 1981 5UtllAY mNDRY TUESl¥ff WEDt£8MY TtmBDAY fRIDAY SATUWfiY 'j I~ I I ~ ~}==~ ~ tt:: 1 2 3 4 . 5 6 ·~-1 I I~ I; I~ I I l-w w :;Ill lJ_ z I 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ....... lk I I I I I I I l- N· ...... 5 1.11 ....... w a -=: :r: ' 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ~ 'j I I I I I I 1 ~ ............... 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 '! I I ~~ I I I I 28 29 30 Appendix I. Figure 4. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS). January -December 1981. ,(Continued) • SKAGIT R~ AT MARBLEMOUNT ,_ JULY 1981 SlHJAY t10NORY TUESDAY WEDNE60AY TtlJRSOOY fRIDAY SATURDflY '! I I 1-~I I I I 1 2 3 4 '! -l ~I ~ ~ I= I J t-w w lJ_ z 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ......... 'il ~ 1'-I I ~I I I t- N I-' ~ "' ....._ 1-4 w :c 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 ~ ~ I I ;~~· ~/ ~~ I I ~ , l 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 '! ~· I I I -I ~ .I 26 p 28 29 30 31 Appendix I, Figure 4. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS), January -December 1981. (Continued) • . l l . l SKAGIT R. AT MARBLEMOUNT -AUGUST 1981 SlHJftY ~y TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSOOY fRIDAY 6A~ORY '! I I I I I I~ I 1 '! I ~~~~~ ~ ._ w ~ ~-.,. :z 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ....... '! I I I =~ I I I ._ ~ ....... N· w I-' ::r: 9 10 11 12 ll 14 15 N '! I I I ~-¥ I~ I ,".; ~ tli .. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 ·~ I I= . ~ ~ :~~ I I I I ;:: a ._. , 1 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 .. I , I J I I I I I c ~~ ' 30 31 Appendix I, Figure 4. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS), January -December 1981. (Continued). I . SKAGIT ·R. AT MARBLEMOUNT -SEPTEMBER 1981 1-w w LL z t-t 1-a ........ w :c ~ 8i u I , I a l 'il '!I '!I '! SUNOAY tiONOAY I _, 6 7 I I 13 14 I I 20 21 ~ I 27 28 TUESDAY HEDNESOflY TttJRSOAY fRIDAY SATURDAY .L- 1 2 3 4 5 I -I 8 9 10 11 12 I I I I 15 16 17 18 19 ~ I I=-I 22 23 24 25 26 I I I I 29 30 Appendix I, Figure 4. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS), January -December 1981. (Continued). I j I I N ...... ():J f I J ., l l --] ] : SKAGIT R. AT MARBLEMOUNT -NOVEMBER 1981 8UNOOY HONORY TUE8DRY WEONE80RY THURSORY fRIORY Sf\TURDAY r-w w lL. z t-f r-a t-f w :r: ~ ffi II 8 1 5 3 l 'l 'l~ 'l 'l 1 I 8 ~: 15 22 I I 29 Appendix I. Figure 4 • 2 3 4 5 6 7 I I ;:::II' ~I ~ ~ 9 10 11 12 13 14 I : , I I I I = = ---==== 16 17 18 19 20 21 I I ~ I I === 23 24 25 26 27 28 .::. I I I I I 30 llourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS). January-December 1981 (Continued). l N ..... \0 SKRG IT R.a RT MARBLEMOUNT DECEMBER 1981 l-w w I.J._ z 1---i 1---i w :c ll 9 7 5 s tl 9 7 6 s '!I 'll '!I SUNDAY t10NOAY . 6 1 ..... I -- 13 14 -I 20 21 =4¥ 21 28 TUESDAY HEONE50fiY THURSOfiY fRIDAY SATURDAY . - 1 l ] 4 5 8 9 10 11 12 [ I I 15 16 17 18 19 I -I I 22 21 24 25 26 -I I I 29 10 31 Appendix I Figure 4 • Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS), January-December 1981 (Continued). · I--~. ,<'·_.::~ N N 0 ....._ w w LL :z: 1 SKAGIT Ru AT NEWHALEM -JANUARY 1982 SUNDAY MONDAY ·TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FR IOAY SATURDAY 86 84 82 80 3 \.. .r 10 17 80 24 88 86 84 82 80 ,...,..,.- 31 I h ...... ' I "'-- f •t 2 I ~ s 6 7 8 9 ,........ 1\/ ' ,y ~I~ ,---/"""'\. I '- 11 12 13 14 15 16 18 19 20 21 22 23 25 26 27 28 29 30 Appendix I Figure 5. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Newhalem (USGS). January-De.cember 1982. 1---w w LJ_ z ........ 1---a SKAGIT R~ RT NEWHRLEM FEBRUARY 1982 SUNDAY MONDAY TUESDAY HEONESDAY THURSDAY fRIDAY SATURDAY ~I 88 86 84 82 80 ~ 1 ~I 80 i4 ~I 21 ~I~ 28 I_} l= 1 8 I ' 15 I 22 g I -~ ·~ 2 3 4 5 6 ~ 9 10 ·u H 1J r I I f I 16 17 18 19 20 23 24 25 26 27 I I I I I Appendix I. Figure 5. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Newhalem (USGS), January-December 1982 (continued). N N N l-w w lL. z .......... . ) ~ I'; .. SKAGIT RD RT NEWHRLEM -MARCH 1982 SUNDAY MONDAY TUESDAY ~EONESDAY THURSDAY fRIDAY SATURDAY 1 2 3 4 5 6 ~I 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 ~I?BdF ~, 1~ ·I I I I 80 .. 28 29 30 31 Appendix I. Figure 5. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Newhalem (USGS), January-December 1982 (continued). ..._ w w l.J_ z ~ 1--a SKAGIT Ru AT NEWHALEM APRIL 1982 68 116 84 82 80 SUNDAY __J 4 25 t-"" MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY S~HURDAY 1 2 3 ..,.....,. .,...,. ~ J \ J \} ._____J " 5 6 1 8 9 10 26 27 28 29 30 Appendix I. Figure 5. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Newhalem (USGS). January-December 1982 (continued). • N N p. t-w w lL z t--1 t-a J -] .l j J ·"" J ( SKAGIT R; AT NEWHRLEM MAY 1982 ·SUNDAY MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY fRIDAY SATURDAY 10 2 3 4 5 6 1 8 4r~· \R ¥{ Jr ~hJ 10 9 lO 11 12 13 14 15 88 88 fH 82 10 £""\. I ~ 16 23 r-- 17 24 ~C*¢t:J 80 30 31 / 18 25 J ..--,. 0 D... '-.J '-' 19 20 21 22 26 27 28 29 I ·I Appendix I. Figure 5~ llourly gage height data for Skagit River at Newhalem (USGS), January-December 1982 (continued). \. l l---w w l.L z 1---1 l--- 5 1---1 w I ~ ffi l SKAGIT R D RT NEWHALEM -JUNE 1982 SUNDAY t10NDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY SATURDAY ~I I I/~ I~ ~~~~-~ 1 2 3 4 5 ~~~ ~~~~~~~~ 80 6 1 8 9 10 11 12 :1 I t~~ ~ $ ~ I 82? 80 13 14 15 16 17 16 19 ~I I '=51 t I ~ I "' I I ..... 80 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 ~I I ~I I --- I I I I L 27 28 29 30 Appendix I. Figure 5. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Newha1em (USGS), January-December 1962 (contintued). l~-' N N a- I . 1 -! J ,. I l ' . l SKRGIT Ra AT NEWHRLEM -JULY 1982 SUNDAY MOt'fOAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY fRIDAY SATURDAY ~I I I~ ~t~ 1 2 3 ~I· :~/~ I =~ I= r~ J-w --~ w l LL z 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ~ ~ ~~ = I ~~I 1 I ~I I -. ::::::.. J-' e5 f'.l:': N J-ot -..J w :c 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ~ ~I-1-I 1-~ l ~ I f§ 18. 19 20 21 22 23 24 ~1-= 1 I ff I Jl ~ ~ ::::::::. 80 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Appendix I. Figure 5. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Newhalem (USGS). January-December 1982 (continued). J-w w lL z 1---t 1---t w I SKAGIT Ra AT ~EWHRLEM -RUGUST 1982 SUNDAY MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY fRIDAY SATURDAY ~I I I =s47 4¥¥k-=sf:z~ 80 16 17 18 . 19 20 21 22 ~= t 4?-=tJs-~ I I I 23 24 25 26 ;1 I I I I I I I Appendix I. Figure 5. llourly .gage height data for Skagit River at Newhalem (USGS), January-December 1982 (continued) • N N co SKAG I 1· R. AT MARBLEMOUNT -OCTOBER 1981 SUNDAY HOND~Y TUESDAY &-IEDNESDAY THURSDAY fRIDAY . SATURDAY l-w w LJ.... z 1--i l- 5 1---t w :c ~ ffi '! '! '11 '11 ll 8 7 5 s 4 ¥ 11 u~ 25 I I 5 I ·12 ·I 19 '•. 26 I I ~~I - 6 1 I I ll 14 I I 20 21 27 28 I :::1--~I 1 2 l I I I 8 9 10 I I I 15 16 17 -1~ ~ ~ 22 23 24 29 JU Jl Appendix I Figure 5. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS), January-December 1981 (continued). I I I ~ N N \.1) SKAGIT R a RT MARBLEMOUNT -JRNURRY 1982 SUNDAY MONDAY TUESDAY -1 HEDNESOAY THURSDAY fftiOAY SATURDAY ·~I I I I I I I ~ ...- 1 2 ·~ I~ I ~ I I I I t--w w lL s= I z 3 4 5 ~ '!I I I I I I I I t-- 25 ~ w I ·~I I I I I I I I N ~ Vl 0 ffi I '!I I I I I I I I ·~I • I I I I I I I Appendix I. Figure 6. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS), January-December 1982, l -1 SKAGIT R. AT MARBLEMOUNT -FEBRUARY 1982 \ SUNDRY ~AY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY TttJRSOAY fRIDAY SATURDAY '11 I I I I I '! I I I I I 1-w w LL z ......... '! I I I I I I I 1- t5 l N ~ w w I-' ::z:: 16 17 18 19 20 ~ 'j I I ~ ~ I ~ .. -~ ffi ,. --. 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 .. I I I I I I I I ~: l 28 Appendix I. Figure 6, Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS), January-December 1982 (continued). SKAGIT R a RT MARBLEMOUNT -MARCH 1982 SUNDAY t10NOAY TLJESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY fRIDAY SATURDAY 'll I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ J ,£ t:. ,£ ..... . 1 2 3 4 5 6 ., I ~ 1-I~ ~ I~ ~ I-w w ,- I.L :: ,e=., L < 1 z 7 Q 9 10 11 12 13 t--1 '! I ·~ 1-t t-= I J I- 5 N .£ c:::. ,__ -w ....... N w :c 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ~ '!I I I I I I I I ffi - 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 '!I I ~ ..: I c:: I e. I I I I 28 29 30 31 Appendix I. Figure 6. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS), January-December 1982 (continued), I ..:; J SKAGIT R. AT MA~RBLEMOUNT APRIL 1982 stmAY HON~Y TUESDAY HEONEBOAY Tttllft50AY fRIDAY SATURDAY '!I I I l=-· I I J l 2 3 '! I I I •I I I I t- lJ.J w e:--~ --LL. - z: 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ........ '! I ~ ~ ~ I I I t- 5 ::= N c ,......._ w ......... < w w :r: 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ~ l I I I I I ~ I~ I : g = 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 'j_j I ~ ~I -~£ i =I I .::. 25 26 27 28 29 30 Appendix I. Figure 6. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS). January-December 1982 (continued). 1-w w l.L z ........ ........ w :c SKRG IT R • AT ~MARBLEMOUNT -MRY 1982 SUNDAY 110NDRY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY SATURDAY 'll~------~---~--l---~-1----+-----+-1 -----t---f ............. 1 ll 8 1 5 s I - 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 &4 r--I I 1-34 7 +=4 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 ·~1~-~1 -===~=1 ===tl =I =t==l ==t=l ===ll 30 Jl Appendix I. Figure 6 Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount. (USGS) January-December 1982 (continued). N w f' 1-w w lL z 1--1 1--1 w :c SKAGIT R, AT M~RBLEMOUNT -·JUNE 1982 5l.HJAY HONOfiY TUESDAY HEDNESOAY TtWSDAY fRIDAY SATURDAY 'll=l ~122~4=1 ~~4 ====t==l ~J 1 2 3 4 5 l 20 21 23 24 25 26 ·l~----~--1 -"'==E-----~-1-===~----1 -----~-1 --~--1 ----~I 27 28' 29 30 Appendix I. Figure 6. llourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGs). January-December 1962 (continued). SKRGI T R. AT ~RRBLEMOUNT -JULY 1982 Sl.HlflY MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THrnSOAY FRIDAY SATURDAY 'l I I ~ ~It= ~ I 1 2 3 ·~ ~ 1 I I I I~ ~ I- LJJ w ~ ,. LL z: 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1-t l 4 I -I -I ~I I I- ei -=-N w 1-t (]"\ w :r: 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ~ 'll I I I I I I 8i 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ·~I I I .... ~ I I I 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Appendix I, Figure 6. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS), January-December 1982 (continued), l J ~. ) SKAGIT R. AT MARBLEMOUNT -AUGUST 1982 . 8t.NlAY tQIJAY TUESDAY HEONE60AY TtuSOAY fRIDAY SATURDAY ·~ I § I I I I ~ I 0:::::: 1 I• 2 3 4 s 6 7 ·~-I :~ I I I z -=$ I 1-w w :=;:: lL - z 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 ...... 'l I I I ~ ~~I ~I 1-a ~ t-f -...! w :I: 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ~ .'~1 I ~~ I I I I I ffi , 22 23 24 'l I I I I I I I Appendix I. Figure 6. Hourly gage height data for Skagit River at Marblemount (USGS), January-December 1982 (continued). Appendix II. Table lA. Site apeci fie downrampi~~ data for 19 March 1982 (in feet). USGS USGS Newhalem gage County line Marblemount gage Marblemount Rockport Time G.H. Time G.~. Time G.H. Time G. H. Time G.H. 12:00 M 83.Ql 12:30 AM 4.60 2:00 AM 3.48 3:10 AM 4. 72 4:30AM 4.16 1:00 AM 82.86 12:45 AM 4.60 3:00 AM 3.39 3:20 AM 4.66 5:00 AM 4.12 2:00 AM 82.20 1:00 AM 4.50 4:00 AM 3.01 3:40 AM 4.50 5:27 AM 4.03 3:00 AM 82.19 1:15 AM 4.~~ 5:00AM 2.78 4:00 AM 4.34 5z50 AM 3.92 4:00 AM 82.19 1:30 AM 4.20 6:00 AM 2.74 4:20 AM 4.20 6:00 AM 3.86 1:50 AM 4.04 7:00 AM 2. 72 4:40AM 4.08 6:55 AM 3.68 2&00 AM 3,96 4:50 AM 4.06 7:55 AM 3.56 N VJ Ol 2:10 AM 3.90 6:00 AM 3.92 8:10 AM 3.54 2:15 AM 3.89 8:30 AM 3.53 --} l 1 Appendix II • Table lB. Site specific 4ownramp~ng data fo~ 30 March 1982. J I• .USGS County line USGS Marblemount Rockport Newhalem sage Marblemount gage Time G.H. Time G.H. Time G.H. Time G.H. Time G.H. 12:00 M 83.75 1:00 AM 4.48 2:00 AM 3.47 2:54 AM 4.74 4;40 AM 3.98 1:00 AM 82.65 1;18 AM 4. 24 3:00 AM 3.33 3:00 AM 4.70 .5:00 AM 3.94 2:00 AM 82.16 1:30 AM 4-H 4:00 AM 2.94 3:18 AM 4.58 5:15. AM 3.90 3:00 AM 82.16 1:48 AM 3.~6 5:00 AM 2,74 3:30 AM 4.50 5130 AM 3.86 2:00 AM 3.88 6:00 AM 2. 71 3:42 AM 4.38 5:45 AM 3.78 2:06 AM 3.86 7:00 AM 2.70 4:00 AM 4.26 6:00 AM 3.72 2:12 AM 3.~6 4:18 AM 4.12 6:15 AM 3.64 N w 4:30 AM 4.06 6:40 AM 3.54 ~ 4:42 AM 4.02 7:00 AM 3.46 5:00 AM 3.96 7:25 AM 3.42 5:18 AM 3.91 8:00 AM 3.38 5:30 AM 3.90 8:30 AM 3.34 8:45 AM 3.32 9:00 AM 3.32 240 Appendix II. Table 2. Regression of stranding index at grouped ramping rates, high (A) and moderate (B) vs. time factor. Site 2 (A) The regression equation is Y • 1.63 • 0.160 x 1 Column X 1 C2 Coefficient 1.6304 0.15976 St. Dev. of Coef. 0.3823 0.04309 T-ratio • Coef/S.D. 4.26 3.71 The St. Dev. of Y about regression line is S • 0.6086 with (5-2) • 3 degrees of freedom. R squared • 82.1 percent R squared • 76.1 percent, adjusted for D.F. Analysis of variance Due to DF ss MS•SS/DF Regressi.on 1 5. 0929 5.0929 Residual 3 1.1113 0.3704 !otal 4 6.2041 ,.--. Site 3 (A) The regression equation is Y • 4.22 + 0.0442 x 1 Column: X 1 C4 Coefficient" 4.2228 0.044174 St. Dev •.. of Coef. 0.2093 0.004288 T-ratio ,. Coef/s·.n. 20.17 10.30 The St. Dev. of Y about regression line is S • 0.3130 with (5-2) a 3 degrees of freedom. R squared • 97.3 percent R squared • 96.3 percent, adjusted for D.F. - - - Analysis of variance Site Due to Regression Residual Total. 2 (B) DF l 3 4 241 ss 10.39812 0.29400 10.69212 MS•SS/DF 10.39812 0.09800 The regression equation is Y • 1.96 + 0.114 X l St. Dev. T-ratio • Column Coefficient of Coef. Coef/S.D. 1.956 2.656 0.74 X 1 C4 0.1137 0.1318 0.86 The St. Dev. of Y about regression line is S • 3.665 with (6-2) • 4 degrees of freedom. R squared • 15.7 percent R squared • -5.4 percent, adjusted for D.F. Analysis of variance Due to Regression Residual Total Site: 3 (B) DF l 4 5 ss 9.99 53.74 63.73 MS•SS/DF 9.99 13.43 The regression equation is Y • 2.11 + 0.288 x l Column X l Coefficient 2.lll5 0.28849 St. Dev. of Coef. 0.2855 0.05661 T-rat:lo • Coef/S.D. 7.40 5.10 The St. Dev. of Y about regression line is S • 0.4519 with (6-2) • 4 degrees of f~eedom. R squared • 86.7 percent R squared • 83.3 percent, adjusted for D.F. 242 Analysis of variance Due to DF ss MS•SS/DF Regression l 5.3035 5.3035 Residual 4 0.8170 0.2043 Total 5 6.1205 / Appendix III. Table 1. Skagit summer-fall chinook tagging data 9 1980. Date Location Ref. Tagging Data No. Ql -,:) -Disk Tab Flagging V1 9/3/80 Right bank riffle at R.M. 81.2 1 R none none pink L none none none *"Snag tag" used Uncertain of sex of fish 9/3/80 Right bank riffle at R.M. 78.1 2 R none none blue L none none none *"Snag tag 11 used Uncertain of sex of fish 9/3/80 Left bank riffle at R.M. 78.7 3 R none none Orange L none none none *11 Snag tag 11 used Uncertain of sex of fish 9/8/80 Right bank riffle at R.M. 78.1 4 R pink pink pink L pink pink pink . - Fish was nearly spawned out ~/8/80 Right bank riffle at R.M. 78.1 5 R red red white L red red white F-ish was unspawned 9/8/80 left bank riff1e at R.M. 78.3 6 R yellow yellow yellow L yellow yellow yellow ... "• Fish was one-half spawned out 9/8/80 Left bank riffle at R.M. 82.5 7 R pink pink pink L pink pink pink Fish was thre~fourths spa""ed out 9/8/80 Right bank riffle at R.M. 78.1 a R yellow yellow yellow L yellow yellow yellow Fish was one-fourth spawned out . I ~ 244 Appendix III. Table 1 (continued) ~ Tagging Data Ref. "'C Date Location No. -Disk Tab Flagging Vl 9/8/80 Right bank riffle at R.M. 78.1 9 R pink pink pink L yellow yellow yellow Fish was one-fourth spawned out 9/9/80 Right bank riffle at R.M. 78.3 10 R orange red orange L orange red orange Fish was three-fourths spawned out i 9/9/80 Left bank riffle at R.M. 78.7 ll R pink pink pink L pink pink p'ink Fish was three-fourths spawned out i 9/15/80 Left bank riffle at R.M. 78.6 12 R pink yellow yellow L pink yellow yellow Fish was one-fourth spawned out 9/15/80 Left bank. riff1e at R.M. 78.6 13 R orange white white L orange white white Fish was one-fourth spawned out 9/15/80 Left bank riffle at R.M. 78.3 14 R orange red orange L orange red orange Fish was unspawned 9/15/80 Right bank riffle at R.M. 78.1 15 R yellow yellow yellow : L yellow yellow yellow Fish was three-fourths spawned ....._ out • 9/16/80 Left bank riffle at R.M. 81.9 16 R pink pink pink L pink pink pink Fish was unspawned 9/16/80 Left bank riffle at R.M. 82.5 17 R orange red orange L orange red orange Fish was unspawned 9/16/80 Left bank riffle at R.M. 82.5 18 R orange red white· L orange red white -Fish was one-fourth spawned out ' I 9/16/80 Right bank riffle at R.M. 81.2 19 R yellow yellow yellow L yellow -yellow yellow Fish was one-half spawned out Z45 Appendix III. '!able l (continued) Tagging Data Ref. CIJ -,:::J Date Location No. ._ Disk Tab Flagging V) 9/16/80 Left bank riffle at R.M. 79.0 20 R yellow red none I L .vellow red none Fish was unspawned 9/16/80 Left bank riffle at R.M. 79.0 21 R pink pink • pink L pink pink pink Fish was nearly spawned out 9/16/80 Right bank riffle at R.M. 78.3 22 R white red none l white red none Fish was unsoawned ::t/16/~U Rignt Dank riffle at R.M. 78.1 23 R white red none L white red none Fish was unspawned 9/16/80 Right bank riffle at R.M. 78.1 24 R pink pink none L pink pink none Fish was unspawned 9/16/80 Right bank riffle at·R.M. 78.1 25 R yellow red none L yellow red none Fish was one-fourth spawned out 9/16/80 Right bank riffle at: R.M~ 78.1. 26 R orange· ye·lTow none L orange yellow none Fish was one-half spawned out 9/16/80 Right bank riffle at R.M. 78.1 27 R white blue none L white blue none Fish was three-fourths _spawned out 9/16/80 Right bank riffle at R.M~ 78.1 28 R orange green none L orange green none Fish was three-fourths spawned out 9/16/80 Right bank riffle at R.M. 78.1 29 R orange white none j I L orange whi.te none I Fish was unspawned I "-I i Appendix III. Table 2. Observation data for Skagit summer-fall chinook, 1980. Fish Date Date Date Oate Date Oate Date Ref. location location location location location location location No. Behavior Behavior Behavior Behavior Behavior Behavior Behavior -- 1. 9/3/80 9/6/80 RB at RM 81.2 RB at RH 81.0 Spawning, resting in Jnitia 1 mark-about 2 1 of 1ng water -2. 9/3/80 9/12/80 RB at RH 78.1 RB at RH 78.1 Spawning, Tag found 1n Jn1 tia 1 mark-streambed I ing 3. 9/3/80 lB at 78.7 IV ""' Spawning, 0\ Initial mark- ing ' 4. 9/8/80 9/14/80 RB at RH 78.1 RB at RM 78.3 ~pawning, Holding in Initial mark--2 ft. of ing W£'ter 5. 9/8/80 9/9/80 9/11/80 9/15/80 RD at RM 78.1 RB at RH 78.3 RB at RM 78.1 RB at RH 78.3 Spawning, Spawning Spawning Holding below I nit i a 1 mark-redd ing Spawned out 6. 9/8/80 9/9/80 9/11/8Q 9/12/80 9/13/80 9/i4/80 9/15/80 lB at RM 78.3 lB at RM 78.3 l8 at RH 78.3 lB at RM 78.3 lB at RM 78.3 lB at RM 78.3 lB at RM 78.3 Spawning, Spawning protecting protecting protecting holding below Found dead just In1tial mark-redd redd redd redd below redd ing i . Appendix III. Table ·;L Observation data for Skagit sumner-fall chinook, 1980 (continued}. f1sh Ref. No. 1. 8. 9. 10. 11. Date Location Behavior 9/8/80 L8 at RH 82.5 Spawning, Initial mark- ing 9/8/80 RB at RM 78.1 Spawning. Jnitia 1 mark-1ng 9/8/80 RB at RM 78.1 Spawning, Initial mark- ing 9/9/80 RB at RM 78.3 Spawning. I nit ia 1 mark- ing 9/9/80 LD at RM 78.7 Spawning. Initial mark- ing Date Location Behavior 9/11/80 LB at RM 82.5 res tt ng near redd 9/12/80 RB at PM 78.1 Spawning 9/15/80 RB at RM 78.1 Recovered in net spawned out 9/16/80 RB at RM 78.2 Found dead Completely spawned out 9/11/80 LB at RM 78.7 Spawning Date Location Behavior 9/12/80 LB at RM 82.5 Protecting r~dd 9/16/80 RP at RM 78.1 Stt 11 hanging ~round-spawned out ' Date Location Behavior 9/16/80 LB at RM 82.3 Resting in shallow water spawned out Date Location Behavior 9/18/80 LB at RH 82.5 Spawned out Date Location Behavior Date Location Behavior Appendix II I. Table 2. Observation data for Skagit sun•ner·fall ch1nook, 1980 (conttnue£t), 1 Fish Date Date Date Date Date :Oate Date Ref. location Location Location Location Location Locatfon location No. Behavior Behavior Behavior Behavior Behavior Behavior Behavior 12. 9/15/80 9/16/80 9/18/80 LB at RM 78.6 LB at RM 78.6 LB at RM 78.6 Spawning, Spawning Spawned out I nit i a 1 mark- ing 13. 9/15/80 9/16/80 9/17/80 LB at RM 78.6 LB at RM 78.6 LB at RM 78.6 Spawning Spawning ~pawning Initial mark- ing .. 14. 9/15/80 9/16/80 9/17/80 9/18/80 9/19/80 9/21/80 N LB at RM 78.3 RB at RM 78.3 RB at RM 78.3 RB at RM 78.3 RB at RM 78.2 RB at RM 78.2 "" Oo Spawning Spawned out Spawned out Spawned out Holding tn Just barely Inf t1a 1 mark-shallow water hanging on ing below redd 15. 9/15/80 9/16/80 9/17/80 RD at RM 78.1 RB at RM 78.1 RB at RM 78.1 Spawning Spawning Spawning Initial mark- ing 16. 9/16/80 9/17/80 9/18/80 9/19/80 lD at RM 81.9 LB at RM 81.9 LB at RH 81.9 LD at RH 81.9 Spawning Spawning Spawning Holding below Initial mark-redd, spawned ing out 17. . 9/16/80 9/17/80 9/18/80 LD at RM 82.5 lB at RM 82.5 LB at RM 79.0 Spawning Spawning holding in-.... Initial mark-2' of water 1ng ] l 1 · Appendix III. I :Table 2. Observation data for Skagit summer-fall chinook. 1980 (continued). I I Fish . :Oate Date ~ate Date Date Date Date I Ref. lo atton Location Location Location Location location location No. Behavior Behavior Behavior Behavior Behavior Behavior Behavior I I j 18. 9/16/80 i I lB at RM 82.5 ! Spawning ! Initial mark- i ing I ! 19. 9/16/80 9/17/80 9/18/80 9/19/80 R8 at RM 81.2 RB at RM 81.2 RB at RM 81.2 RB at RH 81,2 Spawning Spawning Hqlding below Spawned out Inith 1 Hark-redd below redd : ing 20. 9/16/80 9/17/80 9/18/80 9/21/80 N p. LB at RM 79.0 LB at RH 79.0 LB at RH 79.0 LB at RM 79.0 1.0 Spawning Spawning ~olding near Holding below Inttia 1 mark-r!!dd redd ing 21. 9/16/80 9/17/80 lB at RM 79.0 LB at RM 79.0 Spawning Spawning Initial mark- ing 22. 9/16/80 RB at RH 78.3 Spawning Initi a 1 mark- ing 23. 9/16/00 9/17/80 9/18/80 9/21/80 RB at RM 78.1 RB at RM 78.1 RB at RH 78.1 R8 at RH 78.1 Spawning Spawning Spawning Holding near Initia 1 mark-redd ing -~ .... - ! Appendix I II • jlable ~. Observation data for Skagit summer-fall chinook, 1980 (continued). I ~ate Date Pate Date Date nate Date Lo ation Locatton Lotatton Locat1on Location Location Location Behavior Behavior· Behavior Behavior Behavior Behavior Behavior ! 24. 9/16/80 9/18/80 ' RB at RM 78.1 RB at RM 78.1 Spawning Spawning Initia 1 mark- fng i 25. 9/16/80 9/18/80 ! RB at RM 78.1 RD at RM 78.1 Spawning Spawning In it ia 1 mark- ing · 26. 9/16/80 ·~ RB at RM 78.1 0 Spawning I I Initial mark- I ing I l 27. 9/16/80 I RB at RM 78.1 Spawning Initia 1 mark- I ing r ; l 28. 9/16/80 RB at RM 78.1 ' Spawning Initial mark- ing 29. 9/16/80 9/17/80 9/18/80 RD at RM 78.1 RB at RM 78.1 RB at RM 78.1 Spi;!wning Spawning Spawning Initial mark- ing .J. .. - - Appenda III 251 Tab1e !. Observation dates and conditions for Skagit summer-fall chinook, 1980. Date 9/3/80 9/4/80 9/5/80 9/6/80 9/7/80 9/8/80 9/9/80 9/10/80 9/ll/80 9/12/80 9/13/80 9/14/80 9/15/80 9/16/80 9/17/80 9/18/80 Type Survey Boat Survey Boat Survey Boat Survey Foot Survey Spot Checks Foot Survey Spot Checks Boat Survey Boat Survey Foot Survey Foot Survey Boat Survey Boat Survey Boat Survey Boat Survey Boat Survey Boat Survey Boat Survey Boat Survey Locationist RM 78 to RM 85 RM 78 to 83 RM 78.to 83 RM 78.1 to RM 18.3 RM 78.5 to RM 78.6 RM 78.65 to RM 78.75 RM 78.1 to RM 78.3 RM 78.5 to RM 78.6 RM 78.65 to 78.75 RM 78.0 to RM 83.0 RM 78.0 to ~~· 83.0 RM 78.1 to RM 78.2 RM 78.1 to RM 78.2 RM 78.0 to PJI1 83.0 RM 78.0 to RM 83.0 RM' 78.0to:83.0 RM 78.0 to 83.0 RM 78.0 to 84.0 RM 76.0 to 83.0 RM 78.0 to 83.0 RM 78.0 to 83.0 Observation Conditions Good, flow moderate, water clear, weather· ·clear Good, flow moderate, water clear, weather clear Good, flow moderate, water clear, weather clear Good, flow low, water clear, weather clear Fair, flow low, water clear, weather overcast and raining Good, flow moderate, water clear, weather clear Good, flow moderate, water clear, weather clear Good, flow moderate, water clear, weather clear Good, flow moderate, water clear, weather clear Fair, flow moderate, water clear, weather overcast Good, flow low, water clear,. weather clear Good, flow low, water clear, weather c1ear Good, flow moderate, water clear, weather clear Good, flow moderate, water clear, weather clear Good, flow low, water clear, weather clear Fair, flow moderate, water clear, weather cloudy and raining 252 Appendix III. Table 3. Observation dates and conditions for Skagit summer-fall chinook, 1980 {continued). Date Type Survey 9/19/80 Boat Survey 9/21180 Boat Survey Location(s) RM 78.0 to 83.0 RM 78.0 to 83.0 Observation Conditions Poor, flow moderate, water slightly turbid, weather overcast and raining hard Poor. flow moderate, water moderately turbid, weather cloudy and raining ) l J j ) ' J ]\ i ] J 1 -l ] Appendix III. Table 4. Skagit summer-fall chinook tagging data. 1980. Observation dates. September 1980. 3 4 5 6 1 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 11 18 19 2o!i21 1 * ' 2 * 3 * 4 .. @ 5 .. 0 -0 X 6 ., 0 -0 0 0 0 ' f,... 1 t 0 0 X X cu ..a 9 = 8 • 0 Ql u 9 ., X X c:: 10 * ' cu f,... Cll 11 • 0 ..... -cu 0:: 12 • 0 X .c lit 13 * 0 0 N .... l/1 u.. w 14 * X X X X X 15 * 0 0 16 • 0 0 X - 17 • 0 ' 18 • 19 • 0 0 X Key: • tnt tt a.l markt ng 20 * 0 0 0 0 obsery~d tn victn1ty or redd 21 -not seen during observation pertod * 0 22 X recovered spawned out I'* ' recovered dead 23 @ observed a~1ay from red * 0 0 0 24 lJ No observation conducted * 0 25 * 0 26 * 27 * 28 * 29 * 0 0 2.34' Appendix III Table 5. Skagit churn sa1mon tagging data, 1980. Tagging Data Date Ref. Color No. Time Location No. Disk Tab 12/1/80 Mouth of Marblemount Slough 1 White Orange 3946 1900 hrs 12/1/80 Mouth of Marblemount Slough 2 White Pink 3943 1930 hrs - 12/3/80 Marblemount Slough 1600 hrs 100 yds above mouth 3 Orange Yellow 1074 12/3/80 Marblemount Slough 1630 hrs 100 yds above mouth 4 Orange White 1073 12/3/80 Marblemount Slough 1730 hrs 100 yds above mouth 5 Orange Orange 1072 - 12/7/80 Marblemount Slough 6 Orange Pink ! 1071 ll30 hrs 120 yds above mouth 12/7/80 Marblemount Slough 7 Yellow White 4959 1830 hrs 120 yds above mouth ' l . Appendix Ill. Table . 6. Observation data for Skagit chwn salmon. 1980. 'I . ; Ref. 'No. I 1 . 2 I 3 Date -Time location Behavior 12/1/80 -1900 . Mouth of Marblemount Slough entering slough to spawn. initia 1 marking 12/1/80 -1930 Mouth of Marblemount Slough entering slough to spawn. in1tial marking 12/3/80 -1600 100 yds above mouth of Marblemount Slough. chased off riffle into net. initial marking 4 12/3/80 -1630 100 yds above mouth of Marblemount Slough. movtng up slough to spawn i n1tia 1 markinp 5 12/3/80 -1730 100 yds above mouth of Marblemount Slough, moving up slough to spawn, Initial marking 6 12/7/80 -1130 120 yds above mouth of. Marble marking Date -Time location Behavior 12/7/~ -1200 130 yds above mouth of Marble- mount Slough, holdiny on riffle subsequently caught n net, was spawned out 12/4/80 -0840 130 yds above mouth of Marble- mount Slough. holding just above spawning riffle 12/8/80 -1430 Mouth of Marblemount Slough mtlling with a group of 8 chums. All looked like post spawners 12/4/80 -0840 115,yds above mouth of Marble- mount Slough, di~ging on redd. attended by two (2) males 12/8/80 -1700 100 yds above mouth of Marble- mount Slough, recaptured in net while moving up slough, spawned out Date -.Time location Behavior 12/8/80 -1400 115 yds above mouth of Marble- mount Slough. resting in fairly deep water 12/7/80 - 150 yds above mouth of Marble- mount Slough, digging on redd in center of slough attended by one (1 ) rna 1 e 12/8/80 -1700 100 yds above mouth of Marble- mount Slough, recaptured in net while moving up slough, spawned out 12/8/80 -1400 115 yds above mouth of Marble- mount Slough, holding on redd, no males around 12/10/80 -1000 118 yds above mouth of Marble- mount Slough, digging on a redd. No males around Date -Time location Behavior 12/15/80 100 yds above mouth of Marblemount Slough,dead 12/12/80 -1515 120 yds above mouth of Marblemount Slough, holding in riffle, no males present 12/8/80 -1700 100 yds above mouth of Marblemount Slough, recaptured in net wh11e moving up slough, spawned out 2/15/80 -1630 118 yds above mouth of Marblemount Slough, holding position, no males around. ' mount Slough, chased off riffle into net, Initial ---~L---~--~----------~--------~------------~-L------------~----------J-------------~---~ Ref. No. 6 7 Appendix III. Table 6. Observation data for Skag1t chum salmon, 1980 (continued). Date -Time Date -Time Date -Time Location location Location Behavior Be~avior Behavior 12/16/80 -1030 12/17/80 -0800 110 yds above mouth of 110 yds above mouth of Marble- Marblemount Slough, mount Slough, holding position. holding position, no no males around male$ around 1U7/80 -1830 12/12/l)O -1500 12/14/80 -0930 120 yds above mouth of 155 yds above mouth of Marble-155 yds above mouth of Marble- Marblemount Slough, moving mount Slough. guarding redd, mount Slough, digging on a redd. up slough to spawn. no males around No males present Initial marking 'N IJ1 0'- """"' . .257 """' Appendix III. Table 7 . Observation dates and conditions for Skagit chum salmon, 1980. - Date Type Survey Location Observation Conditions '"""' 12/1/80 Foot Survey Marblemount Slough Night tagging operation, not a real Mouth of Slough only observation. flow nigh, water clear ~iill 12/2/80 Foot Survey Marblemount Slough Excellent, flow moderate, water clear, weather cloudy ,._ : 12/3/80 Foot Survey Marblemount -Slough Excellent, flow moderate, water clear, weather cloudy "'"' 12/4/80 Foot Survey Marblemount Slough Exce1lent, flow moderate, water clear, weather cloudy .,_ 12/5/80 Foot Survey Marblemount Slough Excellent, flow moderate, water clear, """' weather cloudy 12/7/80 Foot Survey Marblemount Slough .Excellent, flow moderate, water clear, weather cloudy 12/8/80 Foot Survey Marblemount Slough Exce11ent, flow moderate, water clear, -weather cloudy 12/9/80 Foot Survey Marblemount Slough Excellent, flow moderate, water clear, weather cloudy and snowing 12/10/80 Foot Survey Marblemount Slough Good, flow moderate, water slightly turbid, weather cloudy and raining I 12/12/80 Foot Survey Marblemount Slough Fair, flow moderately high, water· slightly turbid, weather overcast I and raining I "\J 12/14/80 Foot Survey Marblemount Slough Excellent, flow moderate, water clear, ' I weather cloudy I I 12/15/80 Foot Survey Marblemount Slough Fair, flow moderate, water moderately ' ' ' turbid, weather cloudy I 12/16/80 Foot Survey Marblemount Slough Fair, flow moderately high, water clear, weather cloudy !"""' 12/17/80 Foot Survey Marblemount Slough Excellent, flow moderate, water clear, weather clear ,.,.. 12/18/80 Foot Survey Marblemount Slough Good, flow moderate, water clear, weather overcast ~ Appendix iiI. 258 ' Table 7. Observation dates and conditions for Skagit chum salmon, 1980 (continued.). Date Type of Survey Location Observation Conditions 12/19/80 Foot Survey Marblemount Slough Fair, flow moderate, water clear, weather overcast and raining 12/20/80 Foot Survey Marblemount Slough Fair. -flow moderate, water c1 ear, weather overcast and raining ----------------------- J -l 1 . Appendix Ill. Table 8. Skagit chum tagging data, 1980. Observation dates, Decentler 19£0. 1 2 3 4 5 r)./7 8 9 10 u.!/12 1~14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .... Ql 1 • -g 2 * X X ' z Ql 3 * @ 0 u I: Ql 4 * X X .; .... Ql '6-5 * 0 X Ql ~ ..c 6 * X X X X X Ill .,.. 7 * ~ 0 0 ~ Key: • initial marking 0 observed in vicinity of redd N -not seen during observation period IJJ X recovered spawned out \0 ' recovered dead @ observed away from redd y No observation conducted 260' AppendixiV Table 1. SteeL~ead Redd Depths Marblemount Area 1982. All measurements in feet. Date 5-18 6-4 8-20 9-11 9-30 Newha1em S ta££ 482.2 484.8 482.3 483.5 481.3 Marblemount Staff 4.3 4.4 2.3 3.1 2.1 Depths 4.0 4.5 4.5 1.3 4.0 3.25 2.25 3.0 2. 75 -o.4 2.75 -o.s 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 0.0 0.4 -o.s 3.5 1.25 3.25 1.3 2.5 0.5 3.0 z.o 2.5 2.5 -o.2 2.5 2.5 0.2 -o.3 2.25 ,0.;25 -o.35 2.25 J0 .. 25 -o.3 2.0 2.1 2~4.- 2.2 -o.5 2.2 2 .. 2 -o.4 ---/. '~ ·- - i ! - Appendix IV Table 2. Date Newhalem Staff Marblemount Staff Depths Steelhead Redd Depths Illabot-corkingdale Area 1982. All measurements in feet. 4-28 5-18 6-4 8-3 9-30 484.1 481.7 484.5 483.5 481.3 3.1 4.3 4.4 2.3 2.1 3.5 4.0 2.75 3.25 3.0 3.S 2.5 3.0 1.75 2.0 2.25 2.75 1.5 0.4 l.S 2.0 2. 75 2.25 2.0 2.7 2.0 o.o 1.9 1.8 1.6 262 Appendix rv··"Table 3. Steelhead R.edd Depths Upper Rockport Area 1982. All measurements in feet. Date 4-28 5-18 6-4 Newhalem Staff 483.3 481.9 484.4 Marb lemountl Staff 3.1 4.3 4.3 Depths 2.9 3.0 2.75 4.25 2.25 3.0 2.0 3.75 2.25 3.0 1.5 2.75 3.25 2.0 2.0 4.25 3.25 3.0 2.25 2. 75 1.7 2.2 2.0 2.2 2.9 - - ·~ 263 APPENDIX V CHINOOK SALMON -DEWATEREO-LARGE GRAVEL 0+---~~~~---+--~--~--~--+---~--~~--~ 0 10 20 3D 40 so 50 INCUBATION DRY Fig. l. . Percent survival of chinook sa.lJDon embryos dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 h:rs/day in large gravel nom fertilization to the eyed stage. 0!-~--~~+-~~~--~-+--~--~-+--~~ a 10 20 30 ~ sa so INCUBATION DRY Fig, 2. Percent 'survival. of chinook salmon embryos dewatered for 4~ 8 and 16 hrs/day in medium gravel from fertilization to the eyed stage. ~ > -> a=: ;:::) co ~ z • w u a=: UJ Q. 264· CHINOOK SALMON -OEHRTEREO-SMALL GRAVEL 80 sa 20 0~--~~---+--~--~--+---~~---+--~--~~ o 10 20 30 .-o so sa INCUBATION DRY Fig. . 3. Perceat sum val of chinook salmon embryos dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs I day in small gravel &om ferttlization to the eyed stage.. CHINOOK SALMON -OEWRTERED-MIXED GRAVEL 100~-r----~--------------------------------~ ~J<!>~ eo cf· > -> Eio gs <n ~ z UJ u a=: UJ ll.. ~ 18 HR 0+-~---+--~--+---~-+--~--+---~~--~--~ o 10 20 3D .ro sa so INCUBATION DAY F.ig. 4-. Percent survival of chinook salmon embryos-dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in mixed gravel from fertilization to the eyed stage. - 265 COHO SALMON·-OEWATEREO-LRRGE GRAVEL 100 - BD ...J a: > -> 60 a:: :J u:l I-z 1.1.1 o40 ~ (..) a:: ~COOROL .L&J ~ -e-. Itt I""" 20 -e-a t« ~ 16 HR 0 5 15 25 35 45 55 INCUBATION DRY Fig. 5. Percent survival of coho salmon embryos dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/ day in large gravel from fertilization to the eyed stage. - COHO SALMON -OEWATERED-MEDIUM GRAVEL ,_ BD ...J a: > -.-> 60 a:: :J en I-z 1.1.1 <40 wml (..) a= ~ CIJ(fROL. L&J F-~ -e-"'·Itt 20 -e-a ttt ~ 16 HR 0 5 15 25 35 45 55 INCUBRTION DRY Fig. 6 •. Percent survival of coho salmon embryos dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/ day in medium gravel from fertilization to the eyed stage. 266 COHO SALMON -OEWATEREO-SMALL GRAVEL ....J a: > > a:: ~ UJ 1-z 60 ~ 40 ~ a:: ~ CtJfTROL UJ ll.. ~ 4 t« 20 0+---~--~--~--~---r---+---+---+--~--~--~ 5 15 25 3S 45 55 INCUBATION DAY Fig. 7~ Percent survival of coho salmon embryos dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in small gravel from fertilizat~on to the eyed stage. - ..... -- - ~ 1 -- """ 267 STEELHEAO -OEWRTERED-LARGE GRAVEL ~ ~ > -> 0::: 60 :::1 en 1-z UJ w a::: l..t a.. 20 0~--~--~~--~---+--~--~--~--+---~--~~ 6 14 22 30 38 46 54 INCUBATION DAY Fig. a~ Percent survival of steelhead trout embryos dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in large gravel from fertilizat~ou to the eyed stage. ao· ~ ~ > -> 60 a:::: .::::l en 1-z UJ ~ w a::: l..t a.. 20 0 Fig. 2. 6 STEELHEAD -OEWATERED-MEDIUM GRAVEL 14 22 30 38 46 54 INCUBATION DRY Percent survival of steelhead trout embryos dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in med~um gravel from fertUizat~u to the eyed stage. ...J Cl: > -> 0:::: ::J VJ 1-z l.U u 0:::: IJ.J ~ 40 20 0 6 2:58' STEELHERD -DEWRTERED-· SMALL GRAVEL ~ ~CtM'RDL ~4 t« -+at« ~ 16 HR 14 22 30 38 46 54 INCUBATION DRY Fig. lO. Percent surVival of steelhead trout embryos dewatered. for 4, 8 and l6 hrs/day in small gravel from fert~zatiou to the eyed stage. eo ...J ~ > -> 0:::: ::J VJ 1-z UJ u ~ 0:::: ~CtM'ROL UJ 0... ~4 Itt ~81ft -*"" 16 HR 0 6 14 22 30 38 46 54 INCUBRTION Of=IY Fig. ll. Percent surv:lval of steelhead trout embryos dewatered for 4, 8 and l6 hrs/day in mixed gravel from fertilization to the eyed stage. - - - - 269 COHO SALMON -DEWATERED· VARIOUS GRAVELS 80 60 40 0 -i --+--·---f +----+----+-- 20 'l7 4 53 '10 r Ncunn r r 11u nnr Fig. 12. Percent: survivu of c:oho salmon embryos dewat:ered for 24 hrs/day in large, medium, small and mixed gravels from fertilization · through eyed. 27~ CHINOOK SALMON -DEWRTEREO-LARGE GRAVEL 100~------------------------------------------~ BO 60 0+---~--~----~--~--~--~----+-~~---+--~ 60 ~ n ~ ~ INCUBATION DAY Fig. l.3. Percent survival of chinook salmon embryos ciewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in large gravel frcm eyed through hatch:f.ng. CHINOOK SALMON -DEWRTERED-MEDIUM GRAVEL 100~------------------------------------------~ eo. 60 0+---~--~----~--~--~--~----+---~---+~~ so 64 se 72 76 eo INCUBATION DRY Fig. ~4. Percent survival of chinook salmon embryos dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in medium gravel from eyed through hatc:h.ing. I"'"' - ~ - """ ~ . ,._, f""" - - - - ...J a: > -> 0:: ;:) en 1-z UJ u 0:: UJ a... Fig. ...J a: > -> 0:: 55 1-z 1.&J u a:: ~ ::rtl CHINOOK SRLMON -DE~ATERED-SMALL GRAVEL 100 eo 60 -40 ~ -+-COOROI.. -&-.. loft 20 -e-8 loft "'*" 16 HR 0 60 64 58 72 76 80 INCUBFITION DAY 15. Pereen~ survival of ehinook salmon embryos dewa~ered for 4. 8 and. 16 hrs/day in small gravel from eyed tflrough ha~chin&· CHINOOK SALMON--DEWATERED-MIXED GRAVEL 0~80----~-------~----~----+-----~----~78~~~ 66 72 INCUBFITION DAY Fig. 16. Pe.rcent survival of chinook. salmon embryos dewa1:ared for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in 1llixed gravel from eyed through ha'tching. CHINOOK SALMON -OEWRTEREO-LARGE GRAVEL 100~--------------------------------------------~ 80 ....J a: > -> 60 a:: ~ (.f.) 1-z U.J 40 ~ u a:: -+-C[Jfl'ROL I.I.J ~ ~24 Hit 20 0~--+---~--~---+--~--~----~--+---+---~ 60 64 68 72 76 eo INCUBATION DAY Fig. 17. Percent survival of chinook salmon embryos dewatered for 24 hrs/day in large gravel from eyed through hatching. CHINOOK SALMON -OEWATERED-MEDIUM GRAVEL lOOr-----------------------------------------~ eo ....J a: > -> 60 a:: ~ (J) 1-z U.J 40 ~ u a:: -+-CCHrROL U.J ~ ~24 HR 20 0~--+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+-~~~ 60 ~ ~ 72 ~ ~ INCUBRTION DRY Fig. 18. Percent surnval of chinook salmon embryos dewatered for 24 hrs/day in medium gravel £ram eyed through hatching. - - ~ > -> c:::: =:l (Jj ~ z LU u a::: LU a.. 273 CHINOOK SALMON -ClEWATERED-SMALL GRAVEL lOOT---------------------------------------------~ 20 oL-~~--~~~~~~~~~J ~ ~ ~ n ~ ~ INOJBJ!:ITION DRY Fig. 19. Percent survival of chinook salmon embryos dewatered for 24 hrs/day in small gravel from eyed through. hatching • -1 cr. > -> a:: =:l UJ ~ z LU u c:::: LU a.. Fig. . CHINOOK SALMON -DEWRTERED-MIXED GRAVEL 100~------------------------------------------~ 20 T 0 60 2o. 68 72 76. 80 INCUBRTION DRY Percent survival of chinook salmon embryos dewatered fo~ 24 hrs/day in mixed gravel from eyed through hatching. ...J a: > -> 0:: ~ (/) 1-z Ll.l .U 0:: U.J a.. 274 COHO SALMON -OEWRTERED-LARGE GRRVEL 40 ~ -+-Ct:M'ROL 20 .o&-4t« 4-8 tfl I I-*" 16 HR 0-I 55 I . 69 I 7J INCUBATION DRY I n 8! Fig. 21. Percent survi.val. of coho salmon embryos dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs I day ill large gravel from eyed through hatchi.ng. ...J a: > > ~ en ..... z U.J (.J ~ LU a.. COHO SALMON -OEWRTEREO-MEDIUM GRAVEL 80 60 20 o+-----+-----1----~----~----~~=-~----~~~ ss sg n n 8t INCUBATION DAY Fig. 22, Percent survival of coho salmon embryos dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in medium gravel from eyed through hatching. ·--~·-----~----· ------------------------------------~--~--------~ 275 COHO SALMON -OEWATEREO-SMALL GRAVEL eo ...J I""' a: > -> 60 0: ~ tn 1-:z I.I.J 40 ~ u -a::: -+-OJIITRQL UJ ~ 20 -e-4 t« -6-81'R """' ""*-16 HR 0 6S 69 7l n 81 INCUOFITIIJN DAY Fig. 23. Pereeut survival of eoho salmon embryos dewatered for 4, 8 and -16 hrs I day in small. gravel from eyed through hatehing. - - COHO SALMON ~oEWATERED- 100 MIXED GRAVEL - BO ...J a: > -> 60 0: ~ tn 1-:z UJ 40 u ~ 0: LLJ ~ -t-llJITROL 20 -&-41ft ~81ft ""*-16 Itt 0 65 69 73 n 81 INCUBATION DAY -Fig. 24. Pereent surv1.val of coho salmon embryos dewatered for 4, 16 hrs/day in mixed gravel from eyed through hatching. 8 and - cE > -> a::: :::l U') 1-z UJ. c.J a::: LU c.. 276 COHO SALMON -OEWRTERED-VARIOUS GRAVELS 100~------~~----------------------------------~ 80 60 40 20 0+---~--~----+---~--~----+---~--~~--~--~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ INCUBATION DAY Fig •. 25 _ Percent: survi.val of coho salmon embryos dewa.t:ered for 24 hrs/day in.-large·,. medium-,. small and mixed gravels from eyed through hatching. 277 ,_ CHUM SALMON -OEWRTERED-LARGE GRAVEL 100 - eo _J a: > -> 60 a::: ::::l en 1-z I.LJ 40 ~ u -a::: ~C~TROL I.LJ ~ ~-41« 20 -er 8 t« . I "*-16 HR T o. -16 2D 24 28 JRNUf1RY Fig. 26. Perceu1: survival of c:hum sa..Imo:n embryos dewa1:ered for 4, 8 and l6 hrs/day in large gravel from eyed through hatching. - l:t MEDIUM GRRVEL f""· _J cr > -> a::: ::::l en 1-z I.LJ ~ ~ u a::: ~CtWTRDL I.LJ 0... -e-.. "" 2Dt +a"" "*" 16 HR 0 16 20 24 28 JANUARY Fig. 27. Percent survival of chum salmon embryos dewatered for 4, 8 and l6 hrs/day in medium gravel from eyed through hatching. - CHUM SALMON -DEWRTERED-SMALL GRAVEL 40 ~ -+-C~TROL 201 -e-4 I« ~8 I« I ~ 16 HR 0 16 zo 24 28 JRNUARY P'ig. 28. Percent survival of chum salmon embryos dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in small gravel from eyed through hatching. -1 ~ > -> ~ (f.) 1-z UJ u 0::: LU ~ P'ig. CHUM.SALMON -DEWATERED-MIXED GRAVEL 100~----~------------------~=F~==~=T--+-~~ BO so 40 ~ -+-COOROL -e-4 I« :ZD ~8 I« "'*' 16 HR 0 16 20 24 28 JANUARY 29. Percent survival of chum salmon embryos dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in mixed gravel from eyed through hatching. 279 - CHUM SALMON -OEWATEREO-VARIOUS GRAVELS 100~--------------------------------------------~ -eo ....J a: > > 60 -0::::: =:l r.t:) 1-z -~ 40 u ~ 0:: -e-LFIRCE UJ ~ 20 -i!-11f011Jft ~51'RJ. ~MIXED a l6 18 20 22 24 26 28 JANUARY -l'ig. 30. Percent survival of chum salmon embryos dewatered for 24 hrs/day in large, medillDl, small and mixed gravels from eyed through hatching. 280 STEELHEAD -DEWRTERED-LARGE C~RVEL ao 60 0~==~===-~----~----~~=+====~--~ so 54 58 62 INCUBATION DAY Fig. 31. Percent survival of steelhead trout embryos dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in large gravel fr011l eyed through hatching. STEELHERD -DEWRTEREO-· MEDIUM GRAVEL 100 eo ~ _J -+-C1JfTRCl. a: +-4 tft > -> 60 -e-8 tft 0:::: ::::l "*"' 18 I« UJ 1-z l.I.J 40 w 0:::: LLJ a_ 20 s• sa 62 INCUBATION DAY Fig. 32. Percent survival of steelhead trout embryos dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in medium gravel from eyed through hatching. - - F~ p- 281 STEELHERO -DEWRTEREO-SMRLL GRRVEL 100 eo _J ~ :> -:> 60 a:: =:1 UJ 1-z IJ.J (..) a:: IJ.I a.. 20 54 58 62 INCUBATION DAY Fig. 33. Percent;survival of steelhead trout embryos dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs I day in small gravel from eyed through hatching. ...J a: :> -:> a:: =:1 (f.) ..... z UJ (,.,) a:: IJ.I a.. SlttLHERO -OEWRTERED-MIXED GRAVEL 20 0 ~50----~----~~~~~~--~~--~----~----~ ~ ~ ~ INCUBATION DAY Fig. 34. Percent survi.val of stee.lhead trout embryos dewatered for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in mixed.gravel from eyed through hatching. 282 STEELHERO -OEWRTERED-LARGE GRAVEL BO -' a: > -> .60 0:: ::l en 1-z L£.J 40 !.m!!!l u 0:: L£.J ~CtJITROL ~ ~24 HR 20 0+---~--~----~--~--~--~----+---~---+--~ ~ ~ ~ ~ $ ~ INCUBATION OFIY Fig. 35. Percent survival of steelhead trout embryos dewatered for 24 hrs/day in large gravel from eyed through hatch.ing. STEELHEAO -OEWATERED-MEDIUM GRAVEL 100~--~------~--~--~----~======~------~ BO -' a: > -> 60 0:: ::l en 1-z LU 40 ~ u 0:: -+-r::%JfTftOL L£.J ~ -+24 HR 20 ·so ~ 54 INCUBFITION OFIY Fig. 36. Percent survival of steelhead trout embryos dewatered for 24 hrs/day in medium gravel from eyed through hatching. "'"" -I I""" - ~ c: > -> 0:: :;:, en ..... z LLJ u 0:: 1.I.J Q., 283 STEELHEAO -DEWATERED~ SMALL GRAVEL toor-~&-----~~~--~-c~=======+------1 80 60 40 -+-ctJrfT1Q.. 20 -+ 24 Hit 0 ~~~~====;~~-+--~~----~--~5-4~~~~56--~--~~ INCUBRT! ON ORY . Fig. 37. Percent survival. of steelhead trout embryos dewatered for 24 hrs/day ill small gravel from eyed through hatching. STEELHEAO -OEWATEREO-MIXED GRAVEL eo ~-a: > -> so a:: :;:, en .... z LLJ 40 ~ u a:: -+-ClJITRQl. LLJ Q., 20 ~24 Hit a 48 so 52 54 56 sa I NCUSRTI ON DAY Fig. 38. Percent survival of steelhead trout embryos dewatered. for 24 hrs/day in mixed. gravel from eyed. through hatching. _J c: > -> c:: ij5 1-z LU u c:: LU Q.. 284 CHINOOK SALMON -DEWATEREO-MIXED GRAVEL 100~~~----------------------------------------~ BO 0+-----+-----~----~--~~--~~--~----~----~ Q 20 40 60 80 INCUBRTION DRY Fig. J.,. Percent survival of chinook sa..lmon embryos dewatered for 4, 8 and l6 hrs/day in mixed gra:vel fl:om ferti.li.zad.on through hatching. -1 c: > -> 0::: ij5 1-z LU u 0::: LU Q.. CHINOOK S~LMON .-OEWATERED-VARIOUS GRAVELS 100~--~----~~--------------------------------~ 80. 60 40 20 0+---~--~----+----+--~~--~---+----~--~~~ 30 40 so 60 70 80 INCUBRTION DRY Fig. 40. Percent survi.val of chinook salmon embryos dewa tered for 24 brs I day in large, medium, smal.l and mixed gravel from fertilization through hatching. 285 - COHO SALMON -DEWATERED-MIXED GRRVEL 80 -1 ~ > > 60 a:: ::;) ((.') t-z ~ LLJ 40 (.,.) ~ a:: -+-CtJITRQL I.U 0.. ~41ft ~ 20 -e-8 loft ~16 HR ,_ -0 .. 0 10 20 3D 40 50 .60 70 INCUBATION DRY -41. Fig. Percent survival of coho salmon embryoe dewatered for 4, a and 16 hrs/day ~ m±zed gravel fram fertilization through hatching. - - ...J a: > -> a=: => !.1) ..... z LIJ u a=: UJ ~ 286 STEELHERD TROUT -OEWRTERED-VARIOUS GRAVELS eo 60 40 20 0+----+----~--~~--~----+----+----~--~~.-~ tO zo 30 40 so INCUBRTION OFIY Fig. 42.. Percent survival of steelhead trout embryos dewatered for 24 hrs/day in large, medium, small and m.i:ed gravels from fertilization through hatching. - - 287 ,., COHO SALMON -STATIC -LARGE GRAVEL ~ a: > -> ~ 50 ::I (I) ~ z IJ..I w 40 ~ u.l a.. 20 0+-~--~~--~--~-+--+-~--~~--~--~-+~ 4 12 20 28 38 52 60 INCUBATION DRY Fig. 43. Percent survival of coho salmo.n embryos in static water for 4, 8 and l6 hrs/day in large gravel from fertilization to the eyed stage. COHO SALMON -STATIC -MEDIUM GRAVEL 20 4 12 20 28 '38 52 60 INCUBRTION DAY .,... Fig. 44. Percent survival of coho salmon embryos in static water for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in medium gravel from fertilization to the eyed stage. ~ > -> ~ <n 1- % UJ u c:: LU Q,. Fig. ~ a: > -> 0:: ;:, <n 1-z LU u 0:::: LU Q,. 288 COHO SALMON·-STATIC-SMALL GRAVEL eo 4 12 20 28 35 52 60 INCUBATION DAY 45. Percent survival of coho salmon embryos in static water for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in small gravel from fertilization to the eyed stage. COHO SALMON -STATIC -MIXED GRAVEL 60 40 20 0+-~~-+--~--+-~--~--~--~-+--~--+-~~-+--~ 4 12 .. 20 28 36 52 60 INCUBATION DAY Fig. 46. Percent survival of coho salmon embryos in static water for 4, 8 and ;6 hrs/day in mixed gravel from fertilization to the eyed stage. ~""" - - '"""' 289 STEELHERO -STATIC -LARGE GR~VEL eo -l a: > -> a:: 60 :::::1 en 1-z ~ u a:: ~ 2D 0+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----~--~ ~ ~ ~ ~ INCUBATION DRY Fig. 47. Percent: survival of steelhead trout embryos in stati.c: water for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in la~ge gravel froa fert:i.lizati.ou to the eyed stage. -l a: > -> a:: :::::1 en 1-z 1.&.1 u a:: UJ a.. STEELHERO -STATIC - . MEDIUM GRAVEL 0+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ INCUBATION ORY Fig. 48 •. Percent survival of steelhead trout embryos in stati.c: water for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in medium gravel from fert:ilizati.ou to the eyed stage. cf > -> 0::: ~ ,_ z LLJ u a:: LLJ a.. 290 STEELHERO -STATIC -SMALL GRAVEL eo 60 2D 0~----~--~-----+----~----~~--~--~----~ 2D ~ ~ ~ ~ INCUBATION DAY Fig. 49. Percent. survivu of steelhead trout embryos in atat~c water for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/da.y in small gravel from fertilization eo the eyed stage. ~ > -> ~ ,_ z LLJ u a:: LLJ a.. STEELHERD -STATIC MIXED GRAVEL 0+-----~--~-----+~--~----+-----~--~----~ 2D . ~ ~ ~ ~ INCUBATION DRY Fig. SO. Percent survival of steelhead trout embryos in static water for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in mixed gravel from. fertilization to the eyed stage. ..J a: > -> 0:: ;::) (IJ ..... z I""' LLJ (...) I 0:: LLJ ~ Fig. F""' ..J a: > -> 0:: :::l tr.) 1-z LLJ u 0:: L.iJ ~ - Fig. 291 CHINOOK SALMON -STATIC -LARGE. GRAVEL 100~--------------------------~---------------~ eo ~ 16 HR 0~--~~--~-----+----~----~----+---~ 70 74 715 INCIJBRTION DAY 51. Percent survival of chinook sa.l.mon embryos in static water for 4, 8 and 16 hrs I day in large graVe~ from eyed through hatching. CHINOOK SALNON -STATIC MEDIUM GRAVEL 100 ~ 1 -+--C~TROl:; 80 I 1~41-R I 1-e-8 I« ~ 16 HR 20 0 70 74 78 82 WCUBATI ON DAY . 52. Percent survival of chinook salmon embryos in static water for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in medium gravel from eyed through hatching. ....J ~ > -> a:: :::::1 en .... z Lt.J u a::: Lt.J ~ 292 CHINOOK SALMON -STATIC -SMRLL GRAVEL 100 ..,...-------- 20 70 74 78 INCUBATION DRY ~ ~CONTROL ~ 4 l'fi ~ 8 l'fi ~ 16 HR· II Fig. 53. Percene survival of chinook salmon embryos in seaeic water for 4, 8 and. 16 hrs/day in sm&ll gravel from eyed. through hatching. ....J a: > -> 0:::: :::::1 en 1- % Lt.J u a::: Lt.J ~ CHINOOK SALMON -STRTIC -MIXED GRAVEL 100~--------------------------------------------~ 0+---~--~~--+---~--~~~~~~~--~--~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 100 lW INCUBATION DRY Fig. 54. Percent survival of chinook salmon embryos in static water for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in mixed gravel from eyed through hatching. - - 293 CHINOOK SALMON -24 HR STATIC -VARIOUS GRAVELS _J a: > > 60 a:: :::1 (/') t-~ z U..l 40 -+-CONTROL u a:: -+IJRJE U..l 0.. ~ MEDlllt 20 ~ Sl'A..l. "'*"NOPE 0 73 74 7S 76 77 78 79 INCUBATION DAY Fig. 55. Percent survival of chinook sal.mon embryos in static water for 24 hrs I day in large, medium and small gravels from eyed through hatching. - 40 294 COHO SALMON -STATIC -LARGE GRAVEL ~ ~COOROL 20 ~·I« t -e-8 I« ~ 16 HR ,,___ 0~--~--~----~--~--~--~----~--~---+--~ 65 69 73 77 Bl 85 INCUBATION DRY Fig. 56. Percent survival of coho salmon embryos in static water for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in large gravel from eyed through hatching. ...J c:: > -> c::: ~ c.n 1-:z I.U u c::: w a.. eo 60 40 20 COHO SALMON -· STATIC -MEDIUM GRAVEL 1 -e-a ttt ~ 16'HR o+l----+---~~----~--~~~--~--~~----~---+1----+---~ 65 e;g 73 77 81 85 HICI JBRT TON DRY Fig. 51. · Percent survi.val of coho salmon embryos in static water for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in medium gravel from eyed through hatching. ,.--- - - r~ ,.,.. 295 COHO SALMON -STATIC -SMALL GRAVEL 80 ~ c: > ~ -> ~CONTROL a:: ~ (JJ ~· t« ~ -e-a t« z LU u ~16 HR a:: LU CL 55 69 73 T1 81 85 I NCU8RTI ON DAY Fig. 58. Percent survival of coho salmon embryos in static water for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in small gravel from eyed through hatching. ~ a: > -> 0::: ~ en ~ :z 1.1.1 u 0::: I.LJ 0.. eo 60 40 2Dt L I COHO SALMON -STATIC -MIXED GRAVEL 0~~----~--~--~~--~--~----+----+----~--~--~ 65 6~ 73 77 81 85 I HCI.18f.lT TON DRY Fig. 52. Percent survival of coho salmon embryos in static water for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in mixed gravel from eyed through hatching. 296 COHO SALMON -ST~TIC -VARIOUS GRRVELS 100 ,-----l"!lt"'~l-="~~~t-~~~1-ooo::::==l~-. -----. 80 60 ~ ~ CIJiTROL -e-L.RU -e-I'IEOIUI'f 20 -+-Sl'R..1. ~ NCINE 66 68 ! ~-11~11r;RT T n~· or.v Fig. 60. Perc:eut survivu of c:oho salmon embryos in static water for 24 hrs/day in large,. med:lum and.. smal.J. gravels. from eyed through· hatching. ,_. - - - l - """" - 297 CHUM SRU10N -SfATIC -LRRGE GRAVEL 80 ....1 c: > -> 60 0:: =:l en . .,_ :z t.J 40 ~ (..l 0::: -+-CCHTROL t.J Q.. -&S 11t 20 ~16 HR 0 14 18 22 26 30 JANUARY Fig. 61. Percent survi.val of chum salmon embryos in static water for 8 and 16 hrs I day 1n large gravel from eyed through hatching. eo· ....1 a: > -> 50 0:: =:l (JJ .,_ :z t.J 40 (..l 0:: w Q.. 20 14 CHUM SALMON -STATIC -MEDIUM GRAVEL !.mlll -+-C!JtTRCL -&81« ~16HR 18 -22 JANUARY Fig. 62. Percent surv.ival of chum salmon embryos in static water for 8 and 16 hrs/day 1n medium gravel fr6m eyed through hatching. 298 CHUM SALMON -STATIC -SMALL GRAVEL 80 -l a: > > 60 c::: ::::l tn 1-z w 40 ~ u c::: ~CONTROL w 0... ~at« 20 ~ 16 HR 0+----+----~--~--~~--~--~----~---+----~--~ 14 18 22 26 30 34 JANUARY Fig. 63. Percent survival of chum salmon embryos iu static water for 8 and 16 hrs/day in small gravel from eyed through hatching. ~ a: > -> c::: ::::l tr.) 1-z L&.J u c::: UJ 0... CHUM SRLMON -STATIC -MIXED GRRVEL 0+----+----~--~----~--~--~----~---+----+---~ 14 18 22 26 30 34 JANUARY Fig. 64. Percent survival. of chum salmon embryos in static water for 8 and 16 hrs/day in mixed gravel from eyed through hatching. r - - 299 STEELHEAO -STATIC LARGE GRAVEL 0+----+----~--~--~----~---+----~--~--~~~ 'SQ.a. ss.o&\ eo.a~-ss.o·~: INCUBATION DRY Fig. 65. Percent survival of steelhead t-rout embryos in stati.c water for 4~ 8 and 16 hrs/day in large gravel frcm. eyed through hatching. STEELHERO -STATIC -MEDIUM GRAVEL eo ...J 0: > -> eo Q:: :;:, co 1-z l.tJ (.,J ~ l.tJ ~ 2D 0+---~---+--~----+---~---+--~--~~--~--~ 5Q.QI . 55-0L 6Q.(J... 65·G·, iQ.QI. '75·~ INCUBATION ORY Fig. 66. Percent survival of steelhead trout embryos in static water for 4~ 8 and 16 hrs/day in medium gravel from eyed through hatching. 300 STEEL~~~O -STATIC -SMALL GRAVEL 0+----+----~--~----~--~--~--~~--~~--+B--~ so.a. ss.a .·' so.o:~ ss.o,;_ 7S.Of .. INCUBATION DAY Fig. 67. Percent survival of steelhead trout embryos in static water for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in ~ gravel from eyed through hatching. ci > -> 0:: ~ (f.) 1-z UJ u a:: I.&.J a.. STEELHERO -STATIC MIXED GRAVEL 80 so 0+----+----~--~--~~--~--~----~--~----+---~ so.~-·. ss.o .• so.cr. .. ss.or..,, INCUBATION DAY Fig. 68. Percent survival of steelhead trout embryos in static water for 4, 8 and 16 hrs/day in mixed gravel from eyed through hatching. ~ ~ ~ 301 ; ·~. STEELHEAO -STATIC -LARGE GRAVEL 60 40 20 a~--+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+-~ ~ ~ # ~ ~ INCUBATION CRY Fig. 6q. Percent survival of steelhead trout embryos in stat~c water for 24 hrs/day in large gravel fra.a eyed to hatching. STEELHERD -STATIC -MEDIUM GRAVEL ~ a: > -> a::: ::I CIJ 1-z L.aJ !.miQ 1-J 0:: ...... CIJ{I'RCL UJ Q.. -&-24 HR o~:::;:::;:_~----~--~--~---+--~48=---~~so ~ ~ « ~ INCUBATION CRY fig. 70. Percent survival of steelhead trout elDbryos in stat~c water 24 hrs/day in medium gravel from eyed to ·hatching. for 302 STEELHERO -STATIC -SMALL GRAVEL eo ~ a: > -> so ~ ::;:) (f.) 1-z IJ.J u -40 wml ~ -+-CIJfTROL IJ.J c.. -e-24 HR 2D o+---~---+---~---+--~--~--~~--~--+-~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ INCUBATION DRY Fig. 71. Percent survival of steelheaci trout embryos in static water for 24 hrs I day iu small gravel. frcm eyed to hatching. STEELHEAO -STATIC -MIXED GRAVEL 100~------~----+---~--~----+---~--~~------- eo ..J a: > -> 60 a::: ::J (f.) 1-z LU u -40 ~ ~ -+-aJfTROl IJ.J c.. -e-24 t1R 20 0+---~---+--~~--+---~---+--~~--+---~--~ o40 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ INCUBATION OFIY Fig. 72·. Percent survival. of steelhead trout embryos in static water for 24 hrs/day in Mixed gravel from eyed to hatching.