Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
APA669
SH 283 .A.l.lt3 no.1595 CHUM SAUMON SURVIVAL AND PROB UCT]ON .A:T SEVEN IMPROVED GROuNDWATER-FED SPAWNJ.Nt; AREAS B'¥ D. B . ·Lister, o. E. Marshall and D. G. Hickey Chum Salmon Survival and Production at Seven Improved Groundwater-fed Spawning Areas D.B. Lister, D.E. Marshall and D.G. Hickey Department of Fisheries and Oceans 1 090 W. Pender St. Vancouver, B.C. V6E 2P1 October 1980 ·.Canadian Manuscript Report of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences No. 1595 0') i 1'-i ()() I ~ -.;:tl 0 0 I 0! l.C) I 1.0 ' ~""' M M I Canadian Manuscript Report of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences These reports contain scientific and technical information that represents an important contribution to existing knowledge but which for some reason may not be appropriate for primary scientific (i.e. Journal) publication. They differ from Tech- nical Reports in terms of subject scope and potential audience: Manuscript Reports deal primarily with national or regional problems and distribution is generally restrict- ed to institutions or individuals located in particular regions of Canada. No restriction is placed on subject matter and the series reflects the broad interests and policies of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, namely, fisheries management, technology and development, ocean sciences, and aquatic environments relevant to Canada. Manuscript Reports may be cited as full publications. The correct citation appears above the abstract of each report. Each report will be abstracted by Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts and will be indexed annually in the Department's index to scientific and technical publications. Numbers 1-900 in this series were issued as Manuscript Reports (Biological Series) of the Biological Board of Canada, and subsequent to 1937 when the name of the Board was changed by Act of Parliament, as Manuscript Reports (Biological Series) of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada. Numbers 901-1425 were issued as Manuscript Reports of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada. Numbers 1426-1550 were issued as Department of Fisheries and the Environment, Fisheries and Marine Service Manuscript Reports. The current series name was changed with report number 1551. Details on the availability of Manuscript Reports in hard copy may be obtained from the issuing establishment indicated on the front cover. Rapport manuscrit canadien des sciences halieutiques et aquatiques Ces rapports contiennent des renseignements scientifiques et techniques qui constituent une contribution importante aux connaissances actuelles mais qui, pour une raison ou pour une autre, ne semblent pas appropries pour Ia publication dans un journal scientifique. lis se distinguent des Rapports techniques par Ia portee du sujet et le lecteur vise; en effet, ils s'attachent principalement a des problemes d'ordre national ou regional et Ia distribution en est generalement limitee aux organismes et aux personnes de regions particulieres du Canada. II n'y a aucune restriction quant au sujet; de fait, Ia serie reflete Ia vaste gamme des interets et des politiques du Ministere des Peches et des Oceans, notamment gestion des peches; techniques et developpe- ment, sciences oceaniques et environnements aquatiques, au Canada. Les Manuscrits peuvent etre consideres comme des publications completes. Le titre exact parait au haut du resume de chaque rapport, qui sera publie dans la revue Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts et qui figuera dans !'index annuel des publi- cations scientifiques et techniques du Ministere. Les numeros de I a 900 de cette serie ont ete publies a titre de manuscrits (Serie biologique) de !'Office de biologic du Canada, eta pres le changement de la designation de cet organisme par decret du Parlement, en 1937, ont ete classes en tant que manus- crits (Serie biologique) de !'Office des recherches sur les pecheries du Canada. Les numeros allant de 901 a 1425 ont ete publies a titre de manuscrits de !'Office des recherches sur les pecheries du Canada. Les numeros 1426 a 1550 ont ete pub lies a titre de Rapport manuscrits du Service des peches et de lamer, Ministere des Peches et de l'Environnement. Le nom de la serie a ete change a partir du rapport numero 1551. La page couverture porte le nom de l'etablissement auteur ou l'on peut se procurer les rapports sous couverture cartonnee. i C~nadi~n Manuscript Report of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 1595 October 1980 CHUrl SALMON SURVIVAL AND PRODUCTION AT SEVEN IMPROVED GROUNDWATER-FED SPAWNING AREASl by ? . 2 D.B. Lister-, D.E. Marshall and D.G. Hickey Enhancem~n t Services Branch ~][~ Department of Fisheries and Oceans AlaskaResources 1090 West Pender Street Libr.a.ry & Jnfonnation Serv1ces Anoborago, AlaBktt Vancouver, B.C. V6E 2PL 1 Carried out under Department of S~pply and Services Contract No. 07SB.FP50l-9-0907 2 D.B. Lister and Associates Wes~ Vancouver, B.C. Ltd.' t. . ·.:I l l O F~ gecJ ~/,1, ull 1/>-tl... ol\ ARCTIC ENVIRONMENT ~~ ~ .S ~NO DA TA C ~f\o"OID RAGF,, Ali\SKI: 7,07 A ST RE fi~t 191l',' _. ~~,.~ .. __ .,..- St-;L ZZ-3 . l\.?tf3 V\C. \9 s © Minister of Supply and Services Canada 1980 Cat. No. Fs 97-4/1595 ISSN 0706-6473 't ·. Correct citation for this publication: Lister, D.B., D.E. Marshall and D.G. Hickey. 1980. Chum salmon survival and production at seven improved groundwater-fed spawning areas. Can. MS Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 1595: x + 58 pp. , .. ·; :-:. oci- Lo [' ~ 11(; Bi Mj_i L .... :\. --------------~..L i i j COt\TENTS Par:e List of Figures -------------------------------------------------iv List of Tables --------------------------------------------------vi List of Appendices ----------------------------------------------vii Abstract --------------------------------------------------------ix Introduction ---------------------------------------------------- Description of the Stt1dy Areas---------------------------------- Judd Slough ---------------------------------------------------1 Lower Paradise Channel ----------------------------------------9 Worth Creek ---------------------------------------------------9 RailToad Creek ------------------------------------------------14 llopedale Slough -----------------------------------------------14 Rilly Harris Slough-------------------------------------------19 ~Je~hods ---------------------------------------------------------19 Adult Chum Salmon ---------------------------------------------19 Population Estimates ---------------------------------------21 Spawning Distribution---------------------------------------21 Fecundity --------------------------------------------------23 Size and Age Data ------------------------------------------23 Egg Retention ----------------------------------------------24 Egg Deposition Estimate ------------------------------------24 Chum Salmon Fry Migration ---------------------------------------25 Trap Descriptions ------------------------------------------25 Trap Operation ---------------------------------------------25 Fish Enumeration -------------------------------------------28 Population Estimates ---------------------------------------28 Fry Length and Weight --------------------------------------30 Other Fish Species --------------------------------------------30 St~eam Temperatures -------------------------------------------30 Spaw:<ing Substrate --------------------------------------------30 Results ---------------------------------------------------------31 Chum Salmon Spawning ------------------------------------------31 Spawning Timing --------------------------------------------31 Spawning Distribution --------------------------------------31 Age and Size Composition -----------------------------------35 Population Size and Egg Deposition -------------------------35 Straying to Study Sites ------------------------------------35 Chum Salmon Fry Migration -------------------------------------38 ~ligration Timing -------------------------------------------38 ~1igration Estimates ----------------------------------------38 Migrant Size -----------------------------------------------38 iv CONTENTS (cont.) Page Chum Salmon Egg-To-Fry Survival ----------------------------45 Density of Spawning and Fry Production --------------------- Other Fish Species ---------~------------------------------- Coho Salmon --------------------------------------------- Other Salmon Species ------------------------------------ Trout -----~--------------------------------------------- Non-Salmonids ------------------------------------------- Discussion Survival Rate Comparison ----------------------------------- Factors Affecting Survival ------------~-------------------- Fry Production Per Area ------------------------------------ Redd Sampling ---------------------------------------------- Fry Migrant Size ------------------------------------------- Summary --~--------------------------------------------------- Acknowledgements --------------------------------------------- References Appendices 46 47 47 48 50 50 51 51 51 51 53 53 55 56 57 [ r--, i l I l v LISi OF FIGURES Figure Page 1 Map of the lower mainland of British Columbia showing the locations of study sites ----------------------------2 2 Map of the Squamish area showing locations of study sites at Judd Slough and Lower Paradise Channel ---------------3 3 Sketch map of the Judd Slough study site, tributary Lo the Squamish River --------------------------------------5 4 A major spawning area in Judd Slough (upper) and the Pond 2 study site adjacent to the slough (lower) --------6 5 Comparative size composition of spawning beds at the study sites ---------------------------------------------7 6 Water temperatures at the study sites and adjacent surface-fed streams during chum salmon spawning ---------8 7 Sketch map of the Lower Paradise Channel study site, tributary to the Cheakarnus River ------------------------10 8 Map showing the locations of the Worth Creek and Railroad Creek study sites near Dewdney -----------------11 9 Sketch map of the Worth Greek study site ----------------12 10 Worth Creek before (upper) and after (lower) spawning area improvement ----------------------------------------13 11 Sketch map of the Railroad Creek study site -------------15 12 The Railroad Creek spawning area under low water conditions (upper) and a V-fence for carcass retention at the downstream end of the spawning area (lower) ------16 13 Map of Hopedale Slough, tributary to the Vedder River---17 14 Sketch map of the Hopedale Slough Pond 1 study site -----18 . 15 Sketch map of the Billy Harris Slough study site --------20 16 Adult chum salmon tagging on the spawning grounds -------22 17 Length-fecundity relationship for Lower Paradise chum salmon --------------------------------------------------24 18 Inclined screen downstream migrant traps at Lower Paradise (upper) and Judd Slough (lower) -------------------------26 vi LIST OF FIGURES (cont.) 20 21 22 23 24 Page The downstream migrant trap at Wo~th Creek viewed from ( ) and downstream (lower) ------------------27 upstream upper Timing of chum salmon carcass recoveries at Squamish area study sites ----------------------------------------------32 Timing of chum salmon carcass recoveries at Fraser Valley study sites ----------------------------------------------33 Spawning distribution of chum salmon at the four stream- type study sites -----------------------------------------34 Downstream migration timing of chum salmon fry at Squamish area study sites -----------------------------------------39 Downstream migration timing of chum salmon fry at Fraser Valley study sites ---------------------------------------40 25 Seasonal trend in mean weight of migrant chum salmon fry at Squamish area study sites. Vertical lines represent ~1 standard deviation ---------------------------------------42 26 Seasonal trend in mean weight of migrant chum salmon fry at Fraser Valley study sites. Vertical lines represent !1 standard deviation ---------------------------------------43 27 Weight frequency distribution of 38 mm chum salmon fry 28 29 during the early (0-25%), middle (25-75%) and late (75-100%) stages of migration ---------~-----------------------~----44 Relationship between the number of female chum salm~n spawners and the number of chum fry emigrants per m of utilized spawning area at study sites. The curve is fitted by eye -----~--------------------------------------47 Relationship between the percentage of live chum salmon embryos determined from redd sampling and survival from potential egg deposition to fry emigration at study sites. Open circles denote sites where graded gravel substrate was added; solid circles denote sites with the native spawning bed material. Regression line is fitted to the open circles ---------------------------------------------54 Table 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 vii LlST OF TABLES Age composition and mc~n length at age of adult chum salmon at six study sites in 1979 --------------- Estimated chum salmon spawning populations and egg deposition at the seven study sites -------------- Timing of chum salmon fry migration at study sites, as indicated by dates of 10%, 50% and 90% migration--- Estimates of chum salmon fry migration at study sites ------------------------------------------------ Summary of chum salmon fry weight data from each study site ------------------------------------------- Chum salmon egg deposition, fry emigration and egg- to-fry survival rates at the seven study sites ------- Densi2y of chum salmon spawning and fry production per m of developed spawning area -------------------- Comparative abundance of adult and juvenile coho salmon at study sites -------------------------------- Total catches of trout and non-salmonid fish species Page 36 37 41 41 45 46 48 49 in downstream migrant traps --------------------------49 Comparison of chum salmon survival (from potential egg deposition to fry emigration) in the present study with survival rates recorded at natural spawning areas in British Columbia -------------------52 o. E. F. G. H. I. J. K. viii LIST OF APPENDICES (OC) taken in Judd Slough and Squamish River, '·· · : ponpcratures '• •:c::-.b.:r, 1979 to January, 1980. (oc) of Judd Slough, Judd Pond 2 and Squamish 11.11 1>· temperature -. 1980 Rll<er, Harch to May, · Spot temperatures (OC) taken in Lower Paradise Channel and Cheakamus River, November, 1979 to January, 1980. 0 Daily temperature ( C) of Lower Paradise Channel and Cheakamus River, March to May, 1980. Spot temperatures (°C) taken at Fraser Valley Study Sites, November, 1979 to January, 1980. Daily temperatures of Hopedale Slough and Vedder River, March to May, 1980. Daily temperatures of Worth, Railroad and Norrish creeks, March to May, 1980. Spawning bed composition at study sites expressed as percent by weight passing a given sieve size. Summary of adult chum salmon tagging and recovery data from six study sites, November, 1979 to January, 1980. Summary of chum salmon carcass recovery data and population estimates at six study sites, November, 1979 to January, 1980. Length and fecundity data from a sample of 21 female chum salmon, Lower Paradise Channel, 1979. L. Results of marked chum salmon fry releases to test trap efficiency at study sites. M. Seasonal timing of chum salmon carcass recovery at Squamish area study sites, 1979-80. N. Seasonal timing of chum salmon carcass recovery at Fraser Valley study sites, 1979-80. 0. Length and fecundity data from a sample of 15 female chum salmon, Billy Harris Slough, 1979. p. Length frequency distribution of chum salmon by age group at Squamish area study sites in 1979. l- f - l ·I ix Q. Length lrl'C]Ut'ncy clistributio:J of adult churn scJlmnn hv dgc group at Fraser-\'alley study sites in 1979. R. Rccovet·il's ,,f chun1 s;l!nrcoJJ fin-marked (,\cJ LV) dt Inches Creek in h1 o r t h a n d R a i 1 nJ ;J d c 1·' ' c k s . S. Daily catch and esti!lldled migration of churn salmon fry <1t 1980 study sites. T. Chum fry migration timing at study sill's, expressed as daily and cumuLJtive percentage of toL:d migr<1tion. U. Coho salmon fry migr-ntion d;Ha from all study sites in 1980. \', Summarv of chum salmon t::Jgging and recovery data fot· Billy Harris Slough. H. ~lethodology for cstindling chum salmon fry C'migration lrorT! Billy Harris Slough. X. Chum s<Jlmon spawning distribution ilt four study sites during DecerT!ber 11-14, 1979. Y. Listing of churT! salmon fry length and weight statistics. X ABSTRACT Lister, D.B., D.E. Marshall and D.G. Hickey. 1980. Churn salmon survival and production at seven improved groundwater-fed spawning areas. Fish. Mar. Serv. MS Rep. 1595: 58 p. Churn salmon spawning, egg-to-fry survival and fry production were assessed in a one-year study of improved groundwater-fed spawning areas in southern British Columbia. Survival from potential egg deposition to fry emigration ranged from 1% to 33.5% and averaged 16.3%, approximately twice the average recorded at natural spawning areas in the province. Although maximum fry production per unit of spawning area (517/rn2) was achieved with the highest spawning density (2.5 fernales/rn2), fry output per area did not increase appreciably when density exceeded 0.5 fernale/rn2. The advantages of a graded gravel spawning substrate, which had been added to 5 of the 7 sites, were not apparent from the survival data. However, differences be- tween sites in other physical features and in spawner density may have ob- scured the influence of substrate quality. Additional information is pre- sented on characteristics of churn salmon spawning populations ·and fry migra- tions, as well as incidental data on utilization of the improved spawning areas by other salmonid species. KEY WORDS: churn salmon, egg-to-fry survival, fry production, spawning density, age, size, migration timing, spawning area improvement. Lister, D.B., D.E. Marshall and D.G. Hickey. 1980. Chum salmon survival and production at seven improved groundwater-fed spawning areas. Fish. Mar. Serv. MS Rep. 1595: 58 p. Le frai du saumon keta, la survie depuis la ponte jusqu'au stade d'alevin et la production d'alevin ont ete evalues dans le cours d'une etude d'un an sur les fray~res arnelior~es et alirnentees par de l'eau de nappe phreatique, au sud de la Colornbie-Britannique. Le taux de survie moyenne de 16,3%, soit pres du double de la rnoyenne relevee pour les frayeres naturelles de la province. La production rnaxirnale d'alevins par unite de frayere (517/m2) a ete obtenue avec la densite de reproducteurs la plus elevee (2,5 femelles/rn2), rnais la production par unite de surface n'a pas augrnente sensiblernent au-dela de 0,5 femelle/rn2. Les donnees sur la survie n'ont pas rnis en evidence les avantages d'un substrat de gravier nivele qui avait ete place a cinq des sept frayeres. Toutefois, il se peut que les effets de la qualite du substrat ne soient pas resso'rtis en raison des dif- ferences de caracteristiques et de densite de reproducteurs d'un endroit a l'autre. Nous presentons des renseignements supplementaires sur les caracteristiques des populations de reproducteurs et de la migration du frai de saumon keta, ainsi que des donnees accessoires sur l'utilisation des frayeres ameliorees par d'autres especes de salmonides. ,. MOTS CLES: saumon keta, survie depuis la ponte jusqu'au stade d'alevin, production d'alevins, densit~ de reproducteurs, ~ge, taille, moment de la migration, amelioration de la frayere. ~- Chur I comm6 Thes~ fref 1 are._ i· hmvev accr ·, Since to lr~-c fed ; progt the m spa[ 1 exc 1 avail ~~~~ :~ Thi[c; egg : proS2 techn chal---.1 and :1 migra othro:- Squ n and C lower of ,, Oce .1 r JUDD JuJ. Squam coml ·J a g ..., minor ·. Dep~~~ prq ? 1 NTRODUCT ION Chum salmon (Oncorhynchus keta) populations in southern British Columbia commonly spawn in groundwater-fed side channels of the larger rivers. These relatively stable environments afford protection from the extreme freshets which adversely affect salmon survival in main-river spawning areas. The salmon production potential of side channels is often limited, hmvev~;_·, by low volume and depth of flow which n,ay restrict spawner access or cause desiccation of redds during incubation and fry emergence. Since 1977 the Department of Fisheries and Oceans has undertaken a program to develop new spawning areas and to improve existing areas in groundwater- fed side channels, primarily to increase chum salmon production. The program has utilized formerly active flood channels which are cut off from the main river and are fed by groundwater. Techniques to enhance these spawning areas have included the removal of obstructions to migration, excavation to increase groundwater flow and depth as well as the area available for spawning, installation of weirs to increase water depth and control gradient, and the addition of graded gravel to improve spawning bed quality. This report presents the results of a study to assess chum salmon spawning, egg-to-fry survival and fry production at seven side channel improvement projects, chosen to represent various site conditions and improvement techniques employed in the program. Additional data were collected on characteristics of the chum salmon populations, such as spawning timing and distribution, spawner age and size composition, and fry size and migration timing, as well as incidental information on utilization by other salmonid species. The study was conducted at three sites in the Squamish River system and four sites in the lower Fraser Valley near Mission and Chilliwack (Fig.1). Data from one location, Billy Harris Slough on the lower Harrison River, were collected by the Chehalis Indian Band as part of another investigation contracted by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans. DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREAS JUDD SLOUGH Judd Slough, one of the major chum salmon producing side channels of the Squamish River, is located approximately 3 km north of Squamish near the community of Brackendale (Figs. 1 and 2). The slough has become basically rl groundwater-fed stream, with local surface drainage contributing a ~inor portion of the flow. This situation developed in 1967 when the !epartment of Fisheries constructed a spur dyke at the upstream end to ;'r-otect the slough from flooding. This dyke was replaced in 1975 by a 0 50 100 SCALE IN km. N .A STUDY AREA 0 6 12 18 SCALE IN km. CANADA --------------~S.A.----------- BLAINE FIG. 1. Map of the lower mainland of British Columbia showing the locations of study areas. ,;~~-.. ---...__.-. A STUDY SITE 0 -~~,j I k §a# &*--· SCALE IN km. 2 J LOWER PARADISE CHANNEL---~ IMPROVED CHANNEL JUDD SLOUGH fiG. 2. Map of the Squamish area showing locations of study sites at Judd Slough and Lower Paradise Channel. 4 , 1 d ke constructed by the provincial government to ~ :y~r : lcod contro -~ies Provision was made for controlled inflow from ~~~:cct l~cal ~ommu~~roug~ an intake valve and culvert in the dyke (Fig.3). •Lr Squam1sh R1ver . ~•·-. ter is normally introduced for a short period 1n the fall Sq .. 1 :nish R1ver wa . . . · ~·: · 1 tages of chum salmon m1grat1on. Flow measurements 1n 'n tne ear Y s . • 19 ao showed that flow volume 3 1ncreases almost 8-fold between ~'cbruary, 1 ) · .51 ) reaches above Pond 1 (0.08 m sec and the br1dge (0.6 m sec , ~he upper . -ly due to groundwater 1nput. ma1n The main study site included the upper 1500 m of slough, extending from the intake to the lower drop structure (Fig. 3). The other study site was Pond 2, one of two ponds and two small tributary channels improved in this upper section of slough (Fig. 4). Improvement of the main slough and side channels was carried out in 1978 and 1979. The two pond-type spawning areas were created in 1978 by excav- ation adjacent to the main channel. Graded gravel was added to Pond 2. In the main channel the stream bed profile was altered to produce a more even gradient overall. Coarse material was excavated from the stream bed and placed on the banks to increase their stability. Low wood drop struct- ures were installed to increase water depth in shallow areas and to control gradient. The area of main channel improvement extended from 100 m below the intake to the lower weir, 100m upstream of Tributary Channel 2 (Fig. 3). The improved section of main channel is 1470 m long and averages 8 m wide, providin~ 11,600 m2 of potential spawning area. Ponds 1 (510m2) and 2 (565 m ) measure 15 m wide and 110 -120 m long. Tributary channels 1 (645 m2) and 2 (3280 m2) are 135 and 480 m long respectively and average 7 m in w~dth. Potential spawning area in Judd Slough and tributaries totals 16,600 m . During salmon spawning water temperatures in the slough and Pond 2 averaged respectively 2.3° C and 3.1° C warmer than the Squamish River (Fig. 6). Spawning substrate in the main channel consisted of gravel under 3 in. (76 mm) diameter and sands, with approximately 30% by weight under 112 in. (13 mm) diameter (Fig. 5 and Appendix H). The graded gravel placed in Pond 2 ranged from 4 in. (102 mm) to 3/8 in. (10 mm) in diameter and con- tained no sands or silts (Fig. 5). Judd Slough is used extensively for spawning by chum salmon and to a lesser extent by coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch). In the 1970's annual escapements were estimated in the range of 4,000to 10,000 chums and less than 50 coho (Marshall and Brown, MS 1977). The slough also serves as a rearing area for coho salmon and trout (Salmo sp.). r - I [ 5 POND 2 TRIB. CHANNEL 2 -..... ' \ I \ I \ \ ' \.. \ .._ __ \..:---- n TDin I f\10. CHANNEL DIKE ',_INTAKE CULVERT FENCE AND FRY TRAP SITE TRAPPING --DROP STRUCTURE APPROX. SCALE 0 70 140 210m t -·L ....... ...-~ FIG. 3. Sketch map of the Judd Slough study site, tributary to the Squamish River. 6 f.LG. 4. A rna ior Spiiwnine, ar~a i r. .~l:(~d S i<"~ugh {upper) ~1:1d rh~ Pond 2 scudy sitn adj~cc~~ Lo the slough ( 1 o· .. :cr). .. :.· .. ·~··.· ., .. ··~·'."'··''·. , I . l :.:J. .[ r L. 90 70 50 30 1-10 I ~ w ~ >- £D 90 ~ z (/) (/) ct 70 1-z w u n:: w 50 Cl... 30 10 FIG. 5. 3" 2" ,,/ ,, 2 , .. ' ' 7 ·--· JUDD SLOUGH 0---0 JUDD SLOUGH POND 2 A-A ' 'o----o LOWER PARADISE C----C WORTH CREEK *-* RAILROAD CREEK x--X HOPEDALE SLOUGH POND I 3, " lf4 8 *16 # 30 I ""50 # 100 ... 200 SIEVE SIZE Comparative size composition of spawning beds at Lhe study sites. u 0 w a:: :::) ~ a:: w a.. ::2 w t- 15 10 5 15 10 5 15 10 o..._ 5 15 10 5 10 8 0 0 JUDO SLOUGH POND 2 • • o----a JUDO SLOUGH SQUAMISH RIVER 0... /0---a--0- "'0--/ _o-_ ---Q-""' .,.,. .o----o -{)" • • o----o LOWER PARADISE CHEAKAMUS RIVER ' __ .a ' ---0--0---0--o-----a.... /.D---o---o-- ""'a' 0-----o WORTH CREEK oe-----ee RAILROAD CREEK NORRISH CREEK -o-----o.... ...0... ' ..o---o.... / ...... ..., 20 NOVEMBER "'0--...... ---cY ._,__ --o---a... ' 30 10 • • o----o 20 DECEMBER ' ' HOPEDALE SLOUGH VEDDER RIVER 30 10 JANUARY FIG. 6. Water temperatures at the study sites and adjacent surface-fed streams during chum salmon spawning. u~·· L<f r~ It S t·r,, P1 1 , Tl'n:::· grot ' . ' s ]I J m<t r outf trl ·~ l Deve 01.J p!l 2 (Lg were tcf ':: apt ~r Tir, It! ~l perc mate sp[: rela ( Ff' -, th[ _: Wort] of[ ·lc ( Fj _;. rest: ~~[;: 9 LOWER PARADISE CHANNEL Lower Paradise Channel is a flood channel of the Cheakamus River which receives occasional inflow from the main river during extreme freshets. It is situated npproximately 8 km north of Squamish (Fig. 2). The study site is a small groundwater-fed tributary of Lower Paradise Side Channel. Prior to development it did not support salmon spawning, due to low flows. The flow in the developed channel is at all times comprised mainly of groundwater. Fluctuations in discharge of the Cheakamus River cause similar fluctuations in groundwater flow in the developed channel and the main Lower Paradise Channel. Under extreme high discharge conditions outflow from the developed channel may be restricted due to backwatering, thus increasing water depth in the lower section. Development of the Lower Paradise tributary was carried out in the summer of 1979. The study site was deepened and widened, and a short dyke or plug was constructed at the head of the channel for flood protection (Fig. 7). Five laminated wood drop structures, approximately 30 em high, were installed in the channel to produce a spawning depth of 20-30 em and to control gradient. The developed channel is 320 m long, averages approximately 6 m wide, and contains 1940 m2 of new spawning area. The native material in the channel bed was retained as spawning substrate. It is comprised of gravel less than 4 in. diameter with a relatively high percentage of sand (Fig. 5). Minimal amounts of fine silt and organic material were present during sampling. Spot temperatures taken during the spawning season indicated a close relationship between the developed channel and the adjacent Cheakamus River (Fig. 6). Temperature in both streams remained fairly constant during this period, but the developed channel was 2°C warmer on the average. WORTH CREEK Worth Creek is a small groundwater-fed tributary and former flood channel of Norrish (Suicide) Creek located approximately 13 km east of Mission (Fig. 8). Prior to improvement work salmon spawning was generally restricted to the lower reaches of the stream because of obstructions. During the 1969-1978 period an estimated 25-1500 chum and up to 25 coho salmon spawned in Worth Creek each year (Brown and Musgrave, 1979). In 1979 the Department of Fisheries and Oceans widened and deepened the upper 150m section of stream (Figs. 9 and 10). A 45 em layer of graded gravel, from 2 in. to t in. in diameter, was added to the channel (Fig. 5). To provide adequate depth for spawning, a wood drop structure was installed. Large boulders were placed along the banks to prevent erosion by spawners. 10 --DROP STRUCTURE APPROX.SCALE ----FENCE SITE FIG. 7. Sketch map of the Lower Paradise Channel study site, tributary to the Cheakamus River. L L,ll ,; L, l, L" L: I, ,.,j ..t. STUDY SITE 0.5 0 0.5 ~ I SCALE FIG. 8. Map showing the locations of the Worth Creek and Railroad Creek study sites near Dewdney . . 1II1R 1.0 km I CULVERT ROAD FENCE AND FRY TRAP SITE 12 WEIR BARBED WIRE FENCE APPROX. SCALE 0 30m .--1 I FIG. 9. Sketch map of the Worth Creek study site. r ~ I . ·L [ rJG. iC. 1.' '1i:.;r~.i-: ~l:l!:.!k he:.:.~n! c.·.J.,pr~r) ,::;llc ~~lt.r·.~· ~ lu,.r~r} !;~t-~·:r~ '! ng iJ ;-~~ i111p::··:"l'·.1C.:m<:n~. 14 1 · about 150 m long and 5-6 m wide, providing an Th~ improved cha2ne 1s additional 848 m of spawning area. Although worth Creek has a relatively stable groundwa~er source, back- watering can occur when discharge in Norrish Creek is exceptionally high. on December 17, 1979, flood waters inundated the area immediately below the study site. This backwatered the channel and flooded the adult fence. Spot temperature measurements show that Worth Creek averaged nearly 6° C warmer than Norrish Creek during the salmon spawning period (Fig. 6). RAILROAD CREEK Railroad Creek is a groundwater-fed tributary of Nicomen Slough and former flood channel of Norrish Creek situated approximately 1 km east of Worth Creek (Figs. 8 and 11). Though the creek is primarily groundwater-fed, surface runoff from above the Canadian Pacific Railway track makes a significant contribution during periods of high rainfall. Railroad Creek is also subject to frequent backwatering from Nicomen Slough, because of the channel's low elevation relative to the slough. Improvement work in 1979 consisted of deepening and widening the creek with excavating equipment (Fig. 12), and adding a 45-90 em depth of 3 in. to 1/4 in. diameter graded gravel (Fig. 5). Large rocks were placed along the banks to minimize erosion by spawners and one drop structure was installed near the downstream end. Thechannel 2 is approximately 135m long and averages 5 m wide, providing a total of 770 m of new spawning area. Water temperatures recorded during spawning showed a similar gradual decline in both Railroad Creek and surface-fed Norrish Creek, with Railroad Creek averaging 4° C warmer (Fig. 6). Prior to improvement the lower reach of Railroad Creek supported an annual escapement estimated at 50-100 chum salmon. HOPEDALE SLOUGH Hopedale Slough is an old flood channel of the Vedder River located approximately 2 k~ northeast of Yarrow(Fig. 13). It parallels the Vedder River for almost 2 km, entering it near the B.C. Hydro railway bridge. The slough is now cut off from the Vedder River by a dyke which crosses its former point of departure from the river (Fig. 14). The study site, Pond 1, is part of a larger improvement project involving the main slough and other seepage areas. It is the furthest upstream in a series of five ponds. Pond 1, known as George's Pond, was excavated and a 45 em [' L_ L ·L IMPROVED SECTION FENCE SITE I / I / I C P. n RAILWAY I I I ll I 1 1 \ 1 1 I I I l I I I I / /DROP STRUCTURE I (FRY TRAP SITE) APPROX. SCALE 0 li,;;;;;s; 20 40m FIG. 11. Sketch map of the Railroad Creek study site. 16 r:'IC. 12. 'J'h~ ~ai lrot=ld Cr~e~< ~ pawni:1g a~ea ·~mdr.:· low t•nttc1· conditicu.:; {upve.:::) and a V-fenc~ for <.:arcnss retcnt- ; on a l r.h r. do· .. :~ s t 1· e.:ua end of .:..l::~ ~pa~rn i ng <! rc n ( ]. 0\-TC r) . I " .. .. .... ,. I J [ I l.: I . 1 7 SLOUGH 0 0.25 0.50 km t ---1· n~ SCALE fiG. 13. Map of Hopedale Slough, tributary to the Vedder River. FENCE AND FRY TRAP SITE ...... 18 VEDDER RIVER J -DIKE SIDE CHANNEL APPROX SCALE 0 5 10 15m ~ 1 ---1 FIG. 14. Sketch map of the Hopedale Slough Pond 1 study site. f I layf isr sp! , ' ~:lOl; hi .1 ~:r : than sill~ I Thlc duri co[ ·l BI[ \ I Biln 35 k sal ,l (F!J Rive rn[ adul i~r-0 Wl l to p The pal. to 1 The layer of graded gr;JVel added dur-ing the summl·r of J 977. The improved area is approximately 75 m long and ;Jvcrages 20 m wide, providing 1675 m2 of spawning area. Groundwater seepage provides a stable flow tu Pond 1. The flow volume was measured at 0.05-.Ob m3/sec in Febru;rry, 1980. During periods of high discharge in the Vedder River backwatering of Pond 1 can occur. Samples of spawning substrate were obtained from the area of highest spawning density ncar the dyke. The substrate consisted of gravel less than 4 in. diameter and sands (Fig. 5). A relatively large amount of silt was evident during sampling but could not be retained in the sample. The overall salmon escapement to various spawning areas in Hopedale Slough during 1977 to 1979 has been estimated at 50 -1000 chum and 200 -250 coho salmon (Marshall et al. 1980). BILLY HARRIS SLOUGH Billy Harris Slough is located on the Chehalis Indian Reserve approximately 35 km east of Mission (Fig. 1). It is one of several groundwater-fed chum salmon spawning areas flowing into the Harrison River on its north bank (Fig. 15). These blind sloughs appear to be old channels of the Chehalis River, a major tributary of the Harrison River. In early 1979 the slough was cleared of a longstanding obstruction to adult chum salmon, excavated to enlarge and deepen the channel, and divided into three sections by rock groins (Fig. 15). Native gravel was replaced with graded material. Wooden weirs were also constructed in the channel to promote interchange of water between surface and intragravel flow. The weirs do not extend the full channel width, but alternate in a zig-zag pattern. Billy Harris Slough measures approximately 475 m long and has a total area of 8700 m2, of which 7489 m2 has been developed for spawning. The flow in February, 1980 was measured at 0.3 m3 /sec. Billy Harris Slough is part of a larger area designated for escapement enumeration as Harrison River Area 5 B. Chum salmon escapements of up to 51,000 fish have been recorded in this area (Palmer, 1972). METHODS The field work for the study 1vas carried out in two periods corresponding ~ith chum salmon spawning (November 2, 1979 to January 19,1980) and fry ~igration (March 8 to June 17, 1980). The study was designed to gather necessary data on chum salmon populations, and to obtain incidental informa- r ion on other fish species. 20 / 1"--r 0 2 Km CONTROL WEIR 0 10 20 30 40m LiM u liMo! lowoio-::1 APPROX. SCALE HARRISON RIVER FIG. 15. Sketch map of the Billy Harris Slough study site. ~- Chun I -Cl-1 1 gto_ L run n.J[ d~ thrc ~r! I . Tagg i~ c. I - wel .E to != 0~ ·t a~Lt Slot.: cr(_e ~l~ were g,~-.U.' w c b ~L we rr dir ·: esl1 21 ADULT CHUM SALMON Population Estimates Chum salmon escapements to each study site were estimated by tag-and-recovery. Chum salmon were captured for tagging by beach seining on the spawning grounds (Fig. 16). Jn most cases tags were applied at two stages of the run in a attempt to ensure that any differences in recovery rates between run segments would be detected. The tags used were 7/8 inch (22 mm) diameter Petersen disks. These were attached with a nickel pin inserted through the dorsal fin musculature. A clear plastic buffer disk was applied against the head of the tag pin to reduce the incidence of tag loss (Lister and Harvey, 1969). Tagged:untagged ratios were established by examining all carcasses available in surveys conducted at 5-day intervals throughout the die-off. Carcasses were tallied by sex, checked for presence of a tag, and cut in two so as to prevent double counting. To reduce loss ofcarcasses and prevent emigration of tagged fish to adjacent spawning areas, V-shaped fences were installed at the downstream end of all sites except Judd Slough and Billy Harris Slough (Fig. 12). During December 13-18 the fences at Railroad and Worth creeks and Hopedale Slough were flooded out due to backwatering, resulting in loss of carcasses and lowered recovery rates from the mid-December tagging (Appendix I). Population estimates were derived following the methodology for the Adjusted Petersen Estimate (Ricker, 1975). Male and female populations at each site were calculated separately. As tagging was conducted on the spawning grounds and the post-tagging life span for most fish was less than 6 days, we considered that tag shedding rates were probably lower than those reported by Lister and Harvey (1969), ie. 5% tag loss from females. Accordingly, we made no adjustments for this source of bias. Where tag recovery rates differed significantly from one period to another separate population estimates were derived for each tagging and recovery period. Nine~y-five percent confidence limits were calculated for each sex and tagging period by the method outlined in Appendix II of Ricker (1975). The total population estimate for a given study site is therefore the sum of the estimates for given time periods and their respective upper and lower confidence limits. Data used to derive population estimates are presented in Appendices I, Jand V. Spawning Distribution Two spawner distribution surveys were carried out by Department of Fisheries ,Jnd Oceans personnel at each site during the period December 11 to 28. Billy Harris Slough was not included in the survey. The length of each study site was measured with 2 Top-0-Fill instrument and marked at intervals Gf 50 to 200 ft (15 to 61 m) depending on the total length of the site. Visual counts of live chum and coho salmon spawning in each section were recorded. 22 FIG. 16. Adult chum salmon lagging on the t; p cr."ni t~g grounds. The i be t>•J appl"O' Lu.-er· · reg~ ' { emA L~ r he f< Len~ .J niC'!a... . oampl• Low) ' Th~ :0 Fig f. Pnr[ J popol I TheL ·;;- 5 t t1dy :neol reg ... , ;~J ·; t.o ar lor···L an ' ba ·-1: ~hey We [ .E 2 .l fecundity The method of estim;tting mean fccuncJLty of ~·hum salmc:n fem::Jles cliffcrecJ St udy sites Jependin<• on availability of cx1st1ng data and whether beU.Jeen · ' o V al could be obttined to sacrifice fish tor this purpose. For the appro · • . . Lower Paradise and Billy Harris Slough popuLH1ons, lcngth-fecuncllty S ions were developed from respective samples of 17 and 15 unspawned rpgres · . f les (Appendices K and 0). Regressions were calculated according to ema 1 h · the formula y = a + bx, Hher·e y " number of eggs, and x = cngt In em. Lengths of Lower Paradise samples were recorded as orbita~-hypur<1l. whereas the snout to iork length was used for Billy Harris Slough The length-fecundity regression formulae were as follows: measures, samples. Lower Paradise: y =-1374 ~ 78.7 x Billy Harris Slough: y =-329 + 52.8 x The Lower Paradise length-fecundity regression is shown graphically in Fig. 17. The length-fecundity relationship developed for the Lower Paradise population was also assumed to apply to the nearby Judd Slough population. The mean fecundities of spawning populations at the three Squamish area study sites and at Billy Harris Slough were c;1lculated by inserting the mean length of females at each site into the applicable length-fecundity regression formula. In the case of the Worth Creek, Railroad Creek and Hopedale Slough pnpulations, fecundity data from the Inches Creek population were assumed to apply. Inches Creek is a groundwater-fed tributary of Norrish Creek located 1 km west of Worth Creek. Fedorenko and Bailey (1980) reported ~n average apparent fecundity of 2,877 for Inches Creek chum salmon i:ased on 5 years of data from hatchery spawning operations. However, lhey also estimated an approximate egg loss of 2% in the spawning operation. ~r have therefore assumed the actual mean fecundity of Inches Creek chums to be 2,936 after correction (2,877 x 100/98) for egg loss in spawn-taking. Sizr and Age Data ~e attempted to obtain length measurements and scale samples from at least 0 0 fish of each sex per study site to determine mean size and age composition. S;lmples were taken from spawning gr·)und dead ;~t the rate of 10-20 fish ~rr visit throughout the die-off period. Orbital-hypural length measures !posterior edge of eye socket to po~terior edge of hypural plate) were 'C'corded to the nearest 0.5 em. On<' scale \.Jas taken from each side of •he sampled fish in the preferred area between the vent and the posterior :nsertion of the dorsal fin, either above or below the lateral line. Scales ...-ere interpreted by staff at the Vancouver scale laboratory of the ~0 partment of Fisheries and Oceans. -0 0 0 >< - (/) (.9 (.9 w lL 0 0 z 4 3 2 50 24 55 LENGTH 60 (em) • 65 • FIG. 17. Length-fecundity relationship for Lower Paradise chum salmon. Egg Retention Each female chum sampled for size and age was also examined to determine the number of eggs retained. Actual counts of eggs were obtained in cases where egg retention did not exceed 25%. Egg retention above this level was simply estimated as a percentage of fecundity. Egg Deposition Estimate Potential eg& deposition was calculated from the point estimate of females in the spawning population and the estimated mean fecundity. Net egg deposition was calculated by subtracting the mean percent egg retention from the potential egg deposition for the population. I CHUM Si ~r( The ty1 suff~ ·~ Wolf-, : sites t used['i The inf ~;~ar ~ conS:l'.v·l with f: liver·( fish ; were m; pain[' Traps · screen to a r~, to aJ ,, At ar····-and Trap[~ '. At Squ. H.· arct·· the . . a 1 2') CHUM SALMON FRY MIGRATION Trap Description The type of trap used depended on site conditions. Where the drop was sufficient, such as at Lower Paradise and the main Judd Slough site, ~olf-type inclined screen traps were employed (Fig. 18). At the other sites traps with vertical screen leads (Armstrong and Argue, 1977) were used (Fig. 19). The inclined screen traps were attached to the lower weirs at Lower Paradise and the main Judd Slough. At Lower Paradise two traps with !50 em wide screens were installed. The Judd Slough trap arrangement consisted of three 120 em wide screens attached to separate live boxes, ~ith flexible hose pipes leading from the centre live box into two auxiliary live boxes (Fig. 18). The auxiliary live boxes were required to shelter ~ish from excessive turbulence in the centre box. The inclined screens ~ere made of flattened, expanded metal (7 mm x 4 mm opening) which was p~inted and attached to a wood frame. Tracs installed at all other sites consisted of a 3 - 6 m long vertical ccr~en (8 meshes/in. galvanized) on a wood frame, leading from each bank ~0 a central trough and live box. The live box was raised and lowered :o accommodate fluctuations in tailwater elevation. A~ all trap installations sheet plastic was placed between the screen bottom 1nd stream bed to ensure against fry leakage . . ~a:J Operation ,. Squamish area sites, downstream migrant trapping started during the ~]rch 8 -12 period and was terminated during May 16 -23, depending on ·he site. Trapping at Fraser Valley sites commenced during March 11 -22 1nd was terminated at Hopedale Slough and Worth Creek on June 10 and '"':-.e 17 respectively. Backwatering from the Harrison River flooded out ~ ~.!ps at Billy Harris Slough, causing termination of trapping on April 19, ~;ior to completion of fry migration. The rising level of Nicomen Slough ;~aced a similar problem at Railroad Creek, with the result that trapping ~: that site was terminated on May 6. 7;aps were operated at Billy Harris Slough continuously, ie. 7 days per week, ··.:t at other sites the operation was generally either 4 or 5 days per week. ~ior to peak chum fry migration, which started during April 7 -14, · ;,Jp;)ing at the other sites was conducted on a 4 days per week basis. :;ing the peak migration period trapping effort was then increased to ':.1ys per week. Traps were taken out of ope rat ion each week simply by <.1ching a removable screen on the downstream side of each live box. ;,~ing days and operating periods at individual sites are shown in ':'cndix S. l"lG. 18. Inc lir.~d screen dot~n~::ream migrant trnp!> <1r. [,m.;er PaT~<:Ii.se ( lll)per) and Judd Slo"gh (lower). r - l · .... I . . . .. f"IG. ~9. The; :jry.,;;.:;;r·r.=·~::-. mir:;r~=~~ t~;1.:1 ~l :·:rJ!:-~:1 (:rt:!~k v1 ~" .. iBl~ fr:v:n •.J;>~t ~-.:.:·<:m (ul.:~~r:: ·~:ld .:.J\}~ .... ~~':"t..u:; (::;-;.:t:··). 28 During each operating period, traps were fished continuously, commencing at 1800 _ 1900 hr on the first evening and terminating at 0900 _ 1200 hr on the last morning. The exception to this procedure was at the main Judd Slough trap site where severe fouli~g by filamentous algae necessitated continual brushing of screens and l1ve boxes to prevent overflowing and thus maintain fishing capability. The Judd Slough traps were cleaned nightly from 2000 hr to 0600 hr. As it was not feasible to maintain the trap cleaning operation on a 24 hr basis, any daytime fry migration at Judd Slough may have been underestimated because live boxes tended to overflow due to algal fouling. Though three traps were installed at Judd Slough, during peak migration only one or two of these traps were actually fished. For most of this period the trap intercepting the main flow, Trap 1 on the right bank, could not be operated because of the practical difficulty posed by algal fouling. Trap 3 on the left bank was fished continuously throughout the program and Trap 2 was fished after April 16, when auxiliary live boxes were operating~ Fish Enumeration When catches were large enough to make individual enumeration impractical fry catches were enumerated by weighing. This procedure entailed separa- tion of salmonid fry, principally chum and coho salmon, from salmonid smolts, fingerlings and other fish species. Two 300 g samples of fry were then drawn randomly from the catch in each trap. Estimates of fry catch by species were then made bymultiplying the fry per weight ratio for a given trap by the total weight of fry in that trap. Population Estimates Trap Efficiency: Mark and recapture data were used to derive estimates of fry migration at all sites but Billy Harris Slough where no releases of marked fry were conducted. The percent recovery of marked fry was assumed to indicate trap efficiency. Chum fry marked by immersion in Bismark Brown Y dye, or Neutral Red dye at Judd Pond 2, were held in live boxes at the release site approximately 30m above the trap and released at darkness (2100 -2200hr) on the night following capture. At four of the sites where traps covered the entire stream width gear efficiency was measured in the range of 86-96% (Appendix L). Non-fishing Days: Estimates of chum fry migration on days when traps were not fishing were derived by interpolation. Trend-line analysis was used to extrapolate the migration for short periods immediatley before and after the trapping season. Railroad Creek: At this site the marked fry recovery rate averaged only 31%. Fry were reluctant to enter the Railroad Creek trap, apparently because there was no significant directional current into the trap. This conclusion was supported by observations of fry, both marked and unmarked, accumulating above the trap. Of 147 marked fry released above the trap in the evening of April 22, only 21 had moved into the trap by the morning of April 24. Beach seining above the trap on April 24 subsequently yielded r I I I j 29 74 marked fry, 59% of the number theoretically available for recovery. On the same date an estimated 60,600 chum fry had accumulated above the trap (Appendix S). Fry accumulation above the Railroad Creek trap was first noted during the week of April 14 -18. On April 23 -24, May 5 -6, May 13 and May 22 beach seining was carried out in conjuction with releases of dye-marked fry on each date to estimate the population of chum fry above the trap and to transfer fry below the trap site. Estimates of the residual fry population and fry emigration at Railroad Creek are presented in Appendix S. In estimating fry emigration we have assumed that trap efficiency was the same as that measured at Worth Creek (86%). Our estimate of chum fry emergence from the Railroad Creek spawning area to May 6, when the trap was flooded out, was the sum of (i) the estimated emigration to May 5, (ii) the number of fry removed from above the trap on April 23, April 24 and May 5, and (iii) the estimated number of fry re- maining in the creek on May 6. Chum fry emergence after May 6 was estimated on the basis of the following assumptions: no natural mortality occurred in the residual fry population above the trap; daily fry emergence during May 7 -13 continued at the average apparent rate (10,350 per day) measured over the April 25 -May 6 period; the decline in standing population between May 13 (19,900) and May 22 (2,500) reflected a proportionate decline in daily fry emergence rate;and fry emergence after May 22 continued to decline at the rate observed during May 13 -22 and reached zero by June 1. Judd Slough: Gear efficiency at this .site varied according to the number of traps fishing (Appendix L). During periods when all three traps were fished, ie. Releases 1, 8 and 9, marked:unmarked ratios differed between traps, with marked fry distributing more evenly across the stream than unmarked fry. A chi-square test for independent samples (Siegel, 1956) indicated that the distribution of marked fry between traps was significantly different from unmarked fry (X2 = 53.04; df = 4; P = <.001). Accordingly, the numbers of marks recovered with only Traps 2 and 3 fishing were adjusted upward to reflect a random distribution of marks. As noted in the Trap Operation section, the Judd Slough traps were not cleaned to control algal fouling during daytime hours. Fry migration during this period may therefore have been underestimated. However, the error may not have been large, as observations of chum fry migration near the spawning grounds have indicated daytime migration to be generally less than 2% of the 24-hr total (Lister et al. 1979). 30 The intake from the Squamish River,~though closed during fry migration, actually leaked a flow of .02 -.03mJ/sec into Judd Slough. To establish whether a significant number of chum fry had entered from the Squamish River, a trap was installed at the intake to screen the entire flow as it passed from the culvert to the slough. In 14 fishing days from May 2 to May 23 this trap caught 58 coho smolts, 1 trout fry and several sculpins, stickleback and lamprey. As no chum fry were caught we concluded that fry input from spawning areas further upstream was not a source of error in this study. Billy Harris Slough: Chum fry trapping at this site was terminated on April 19 due to flooding, well before the end of migration. An estimate of the approximate total emigration from the slough was derived by examin- ation of the seasonal migration pattern and comparison with that at other sites. Fry migration data and a detailed explanation of the method used to estimate total emigration are presented in Appendix W. Fry Length and Weight Random samples of 40 chum fry were taken at each study site for length and weight measurement twice weekly during peak migration and once weekly in non-peak periods. Measurements obtained from live, anesthetized (MS 222) fry were fork length to the nearest mm and blotted weight to the nearest 0.01 g. OTHER FISH SPECIES Counts of other fish species observed in the course of the chum salmon study were recorded. Except for coho frymigrants, which were abundant at several sites (Appendix U), no attempt has been made to develop estimates of abund- ance for species other than chum salmon. STREAM TEMPERATURES During the adult chum salmon study spot measurements of water temperature were taken at each study site and at the stream into which the study stream flowed (Appendices A and C). On all fishing days during fry migration temperature records were obtained at each site using maximum-minimum thermo- meters. Short-term records of temperature ranges in adjacent streams were also obtaine~ for comparison (Appendices B, D and E). SPAWNING SUBSTRATE To characterize spawning bed quality at each study site we obtained three gravel samples in June from the more heavily utilized spawning areas. The three samples per study site were then combined into one composite sample for sieve analysis. Substrate samples were collected by trowel and hand within the perimeter of an aluminum corer or cylinder 30 em in diameter and I L r l [ J 31 45 em high. Tho corer was worked into the gravel to a depth of 15 em. Samples were transported from the field in plastic buckets to a Vancouver laboratory for drying and sieve analysis. RESULTS CHUM SALMON SPAWNING Spawning Timing As counts of live spawners were not conducted on a regular basis the time of spawning must be inferred from seasonal die-off timing (Appendices M and N). Assuming an average of 7 days active spawning prior to death (Lister and Harvey, 1969), the die-off pattern probably reflects spawning intensity 5 -10 days previous. The carcass recovery patterns indicate that at most study sites spawning occurred from mid-November to early January and peaked during early to mid-December (Figs. 20 and 21). Fifty percent die-off occurred at the Squamish sites and Worth Creek during the December 10 -17 period. Visua1 observations suggest that this was also the case at Railroad Creek where hig~water levels prevented carcass recovery on December 17, delaying the peak recovery until December 21 -22 (Fig. 21). The Hopedale Slough population spawned over a longer period than other populations. Spawning and die-off were well underway at this site on November 2and extended into mid-January. Chu~: spawning at Worth Creek started later and took place over a shorter period (35 versus 55 days) than at other study sites (Fig. 21). It is likely that spawners could not reach the improved section until flows in- creased sufficiently to permit migration over shallow sections of stream in the lower part of Worth Creek. Carcass recovery data from Billy Harris Slough indicate that chum spawning at that site extended from late October to early January, with approximately 80% taking place between November 10 and December 27. Spawning Distribution Spawner distribution at the four stream-like study sites is compared in Fig. 22. In Worth and Railroad creeks spa~ning was distributed quite evenly over the entire length of improved channel, whereas in Judd Slough and Lower Paradise channel it was concentrated in certain sections. In Judd Slough spawning was concentrated in the middle third of the improved channel, with approximately 95% being observed in 50% of the channel area. ~~~ .. tillS -vet 11 0 w 0:: w > 0 u w 0:: (./) w (./) (./) <I: u 0:: <r: u LJ.... 0 ~ 0 40 30 20 10 40 30 20 10 40 30 20 10 NOV 16 NOV 20 NOV NOV 23-26 29 32 JUDD SLOUGH (TOTAL) JUDD SLOUGH POND 2 LOWER PARADISE CHANNEL DEC DEC DEC DEC DEC DEC 28 JAN 3 5-6 10-11 14-15 19 24 SAMPLING DATES JAN 13 FIG. 20. Timing of chu1n salmon carcass recoveries at Squamish area study sites. f-~ r ~- r- l . 0 w a:: w > 0 u w a:: (./) w (./) (./) <{ u a:: <{ u l.J... 0 ,',o 0' ~ _j - j ') ] j j 40 30 20 10 40 30 20 10 40 30 20 10 33 NOV NOV NOV NOV NOV DEC DEC 2 9 15-17 23 28 3 7 WORTH CREEK RAILROAD CREEK HOPEDALE SLOUGH POND I DEC DEC DEC DEC JAN JAN JAN JAN 12 l 17 21 27 2 7 15 17-19 SAMPLING DATES FIG. 21. Timing of chum salmon carcass recoveries at Fraser Valley study sites. 20 - 15 - 10 - 5 - 20 - 15 - 10 - 5 - z 0 1-20 - ::::> co a: 15 - 1- (/) 0 10 - ~ 0 5 - 20 - 15 - 10 - 5 - 34 - - ~ - -n-f I I I ~ r- 1---r--,.----r--- f-1 - r-- I I I 0 20 40 DOWNSTREAM JUDD SLOUGH - - ~ --,_ _n--,_, J r- r---1 • f--- I 60 ' LOWER PARADISE CHANNEL - -r-- l • I WORTH r--CREEK - r-- RAILROAD CREEK I 80 100 UPSTREAM 0/o OF STUDY SITE LENGTH FIG. 22. Spawning distribution of chum salmon at the four stream-type study sites. ~~ f, At Lo1.;rer Paradise spawning W.JS heaviest at the upper and lower ends; 60% of the channel area supported approximately 95% of the spawning. In Judd Slough Po11d 2 the heaviest concentration of spawning occurred in the north1.;res t corner of the pond, along the side adjacent to the Squami sh River. Ninety-eight percent of the spawners were observed in approximately 52% of the pond area. Though the distribution survey missed the main spa1.;rning period at Hopedale Slough Pond 1, observations made in the course of tagging and dead recovery surveys indicated that the heaviest spawning occurred at the upstrci1Jll end of the pond, adjacent to the dyke. It should also be noted that during the mid-December high water period at Railroad Creek a portion of the chum salmon population migrated above the Canadian Pacific Railway tracks to spawn in seasonal creeks draining pasture land. A total of 399 chum carcasses, 14.8% of the Railroad Creek total, were recovered in this area upstream of the improved channel. Aoe and Size Composition Spawning escapements to all study sites included age groups 3, 4 and 5. Age 4 fish comprised the majority at each site except Worth Creek, where age 3 predominated (Table 1). Spawners were older on the average in the Squamish area, where age 5 fish comprised 14.9 -20.2% of samples compared to 1.6 -10% in the Fraser Valley. At a given age Squamish chum salmon were also slightly larger than Fraser Valley chums, with the difference in length among age 4 males and females averaging 1.1 em. Population Size and Egg Deposition Estimates of spawning populations and egg deposition are presented in Table 2. Appendices J and V show the 95% confidence limits for each popul- ation estimate. Egg retention, which ranged from 0.9% to 5.2% at the various sites, could not be considered excessive. The highest egg retention occurred at Railroad Creek where population density (2.5 females/m2) was also highest. Straying to Study Sites Recoveries of fin-marked adult chum salmon at Worth and Railroad creeks indicated that some straying from nearby Inches Creek occurred in 1979. Six and 7 marked fish were recovered at Worth and Railroad creeks respectively. These fish are believed to have been returns from releases of fin-marked fry at Inches Creek hatchery in 1977 (Fedorenko and Bailey, 1980). Details of marked fish recoveries are presented in Appendix R. TABLE 1. Age composition and mean length at age of adult chum salmon at six study sites ' in 1979. Male Female Site 3 4 5 Sample 3 4 5 Sample Size Size Judd Slough % 22.4 59.2 18.4 98 28.3 51.5 20.2 99 Mean Length(cm) 55.4 61.8 64.4 54.3 59.7 62.0 Lower % 27.9 54.9 17.2 122 25.6 59.5 14.9 121 Paradise Mean Channel Length(cm) 55.8 60.7 62.5 54.6 59.6 62.3 Worth Creek % 57.3 37.1 5.6 89 68.5 28.7 2.8 108 Mean w 0' Length(cm) ' 53.9 60.5 63.0 53.0 58.0 54.7 Railroad % 30.3 68.0 1.6 122 29.2 67.7 3.1 130 Creek Mean Length(cm) 53.7 60.3 64.8 52.2 59.5 58.8 Hopedale % 32.2 57. 8 10.0 90 40.9 50.0 9.1 88 Slough Mean Length(cm) 53.7 59.4 61.7 52.7 58.3 59.8 Billy Harris % 28.0 67.2 4.8 186 17.8 78.8 3.4 118 Slough 1 1 Comparable length data not available. TABLE 2. Estimated chum salmon spawning populations and egg deposition at the seven study sites. Site PoEulation Estimates Mean Potential Egg Net Egg Male Female Total Fecundity Egg Deposition Retention(%) Deposition Judd Slough 1599 1536 3135a 3234 4,945,ooob 2.4 4,826,000 Judd Slough 176 66 242 3337 220,000 0.9 218,000 Pond 2 Lower Paradise 870 488 1358 3250 1,586,000 1.4 1,564,000 Worth Creek 665 384 1049 2936 1,127,000 2.2 1,102,000 Railroad Creek 1558 1630 3188 2936 4,786,000 5.2 4,537,000 l.0 ~I Hopedale Slough 279 200 479 2936 587,000 1.5 578,000 Pond 1 Billy Harris 4107 2475 6582 3524 8,722,000 c Slough alncludes all of Judd Slough and tributaries minus Pond 2. b Based on adj us tmen t in number of females ( -7) to reflect spawning below fry trap site. CE . gg retent1on measures not taken. 38 CHUM SALMON FRY MIGRATION Migration Timing The seasonal pattern of chum salmon fry migration at six of the seven sites is shown in Figs. 23 and 24. Data from Billy Harris Slough have not been graphed because trapping was terminated at that site well before migration was complete. At five of the seven study sites 50% of migration had occurred by mid-tc late April (Table 3).· At Worth Creek and Hopedale Slough 50% migration did not occur until mid-to late May. The late migration timing at Worth Creek may have been due to a relatively cold temper~ture regime during incubation and emergence, eg. Worth Creek averaged 1.2°C cooler than nearby Railroad Creek in April, however the lack of continuous temperature records over the incubation period precludes analysis. The relatively late emigration from Hopedale Slough may have resulted from the tendency for fry to rear in the pond for a period (see section on Migrant Size), combined with low population pressure. Migration Estimates The estimated chum salmon fry migration from each study site is presented in Table 4. Estimates ranged from 6,000 fry at Hopedale Slough to 1.5 million fry at Billy Harris Slough. It should be noted that the Railroad Creek and Billy Harris Slough estimates are based on extrapolations from data which were incomplete due to flooding of traps prior to the end of fry migration. Migrant Size Length and weight measures were obtained from samples of chum fry migrants at all study sites except Billy Harris Slough (Appendix Y). Seasonal trends in mean weight and sample variation in weight are shown for each study site in Figs. 25 and 26. At all Squamish sites mean fry weight tended to increase as migration progressed, whereas no consistent seasonal trend in weight was evident at the Fraser Valley sites. Over the migration period chum fry were larger on the average at Squamish than at the Fraser Valley sites (Table 5). However, individual fry weight varied more in the Fraser Valley, being greatest at Railroad Creek and Hopedale Slough Pond 1. This relatively large variation was apparently due to fry in the 500 -1200 mg size range which had achieved considerable growth prior to emigration. The pond-like conditions at these two sites may have influenced fry to take up residence for a period. Seasonal changes in the length-weight relationship of migrating fry were also apparent at some study sites. Plots of the weight-frequency distribution of fry in the modal length class (38 mm) indicated an increase in weight as migration progressed, particularly in the Squamish area (Fig. 27). z 0 t a:: (.9 ::2: >-a:: u... ~ 0 ~ <! 0 7.5 5.0 2.5 7.5 5.0 2.5 7.5 5.0 2.5 10 20 MARCH 30 39 10 20 APRIL 30 JUDD SLOUGH (TOTAL) JUDO SLOUGH POND 2 LOWER PARADISE CHANNEL 10 20 MAY FIG. 23. Downstream migration timing of churn salmon fry at Squarnish area study sites. 6 4 z 0 1-2 <( a: 1.9 :::E lL. 0 ~ 0 >-_.J <( Cl 6 4 2 60 50 0 0 0 40 )( - :I: IJl lL 30 lL. 0 0 z 20 10 40 ~I EMIGRATION -ESTIMATED POPULATION I 20 30 MARCH ABOVE TRAP 10 20 APRIL 141,000 I 30 10 WORTH CREEK HOPEDALE SLOUGH POND I RAILROAD CREEK TRAP FLOODED 20 MAY 30 10 JUNE FIG. 24. Downstream migration timing of chum salmon fry at Fraser Valley study sites. 1- [ __ [ TABLE 3. Study Site 41 Timing of chum salmon fry migration at study sites, as indicated by dates of 10%, 50% and 90% migration. Stage of Migration 10/o SOlo 90/o Judd Slough April 9 April 23 May 4 Judd Slough April 15 April 30 May 10 Pond 2 Lower Paradise April 1 April 20 May 5 \.Jorth Creek Apri 1 30 May 12 May 29 Railroad Creek Apri 1 10 April 29 a Hopedale Slough April 18 May 20 June 4 Pond 1 Billy Harris March 27 April 14 a Slough aTrapping data incomplete. TABLE 4. Estimates of chum salmon fry migration at study sites. Study Site Point Estimate YS% Confidence Limits Judd Slough 844,000 740,000 -974,000 Judd Slough 37,600 33,300 -41,800 Pond 2 Lower Paradise 329,000 302,000 -355,000 \.Jorth Creek 378,000 363,000 -392,000 Railroad Creek 341,000 251,000a---- Hopedale Slough 6,000 4,800 -7,200 Pond 1 Billy Harris Slough 1,543,000 986,000a- a At these sites the lower confidence limit corresponds to fry emergenceand migration enumerated before premature termination of trapping. 01 E 1- I l!) w ~ z <! w ~ 450 400 350 300 250 450 400 350 300 250 450 400 350 300 250 10 42 WORTH CREEK 30 50 HOPEDALE SLOUGH 70 CUM.!)LATIVE % MIGRATION RAILROAD CREEK 90 FIG. 25. Seasonal trend in mean weight of migrant chum salmon fry at Squamish area study sites. Vertical lines represent ±1 standard deviation. I I L. [ l r 450 400 350 300 250 450 0'1 E -400 1- I (.!) 350 w ~ z 300 <! w ::2 250 450 400 350 300 250 10 43 30 50 JUDD SLOUGH JUDD SLOUGH POND 2 LOWER PARADISE CHANNEL 70 CUMULATIVE % MIGR.ATION 90 FIG. 26. Seasonal trend in mean weight of migrant chum salmon fry at Fraser Valley study sites. Vertical lines represent ±1 standard deviation. 15 10 5 15 >-a:: lL 10 lL 0 a:: 5 w CD :::!; :::> 2 15 10 5 EARLY MIDDLE LATE JUDD SLOUGH JUDD SLOUGH POND 2 LOWER PARADISE CHANNEL WORTH CREEK. RAILROAD CREEK HOPEDALE SLOUGH POND I 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 WEIGHT (g) FIG. 27. Weight frequency distribution of 38 mm chum salmon fry during the early (0-25%), middle (25-75%) and late (75-100%) stages of migration. 45 TABLE 5. Su~nary of chum salmon fry weight data from each study site. Range in Mean Seasonal Individual Coefficient of Study Site !'lean Weight(mg) Weights(mg) Variation(/o)a Judd Slough 354 240 -470 7.8 Judd Slough 340 220 -420 10. 1 Pond 2 Lower Paradise 338 240 -450 10.5 Harth Creek 313 150 -670 19.2 Railroad Creek 333 120 -720 27.4 Hopedale Slough 334 170 -1,200 26.0 aCoefficient of variation is the sample standard deviation expressed as a percentage of the sample mean. At Judd Slough and Lower Paradise the weight frequency was characterized by a unimodal distribution (principally 300 -350 mg) during the early stages of migration, a bimodal distribution at peak migration, and a shift to a unimodal distribution at larger size (350 -400 mg) in the later stages. Height-frequency distributions for 38 mm fry in the Fraser Valley showed more variation at all stages of migration and a slight tendency toward increased weight as the migration progressed. CHUM SALMON EGG-TO-FRY SURVIVAL Egg-to-fry survival rates, calculated from both potential and net egg deposition, are presented for all study sites in Table 6. At five of the seven sites survival rates from potential egg deposition were relatively high, ranging from 17.1% to 33.5%. Lower survival rates were measured at Railroad Creek (7.1%) and Hopedale Slough (1.0%). As noted earlier, the estimates of fry emigration from both Railroad Creek and Billy Harris Slough were based on extrapolations from incomplete trapping data. A lower level of confidence therefore applies to the survival estimates for these sites. Minimum egg-to-fry survival rates at Railroad Creek and Billy Harris Slough, calculated from the number of fry actually enumerated (Table 4), would amount to 5.2% and 11.3% respectively. 46 TABLE 6. Chum salmon egg deposition, fry emigration and egg-to-fry survival rates at the seven study sites. Egg Deeosition Percent Survival From From Fry Potential Net Study Site Potential Net Emigration Deposition Deposition Judd Slough 4,945,000 4,826,000 844,000 17. 1 17.5 Judd Slough 220,000 218,000 37,600 17. 1 17.2 Pond 2 Lower Paradise 1,586,000 1,564,000 329,000 20.7 21.0 Worth Creek 1,127,000 1,102,000 378,000 33.5 34.3 Railroad Creek 4,786,000 4,537,000 341,000 7. 1 7.5 Hopedale Slough 587,000 578,000 6,000 1.0 1.0 Pond 1 Billy Harris 8, 722,000 1,543,000 17.7 Slough DENSITY OF SPAWNING AND FRY PRODUCTION Chum salmon spawning density and fry production per area are presented for each study site in Table 7. As a major portion of the developed spawning area was not utilized at some sites, density and fry production were expressed in relation to both total area and area actually used for spawning. Of the six sites where spawner distribution was documented, only at Worth and Railroad creeks did utilization approach 100% of the available area. Density of chum spawning and fry production varie2 considerably between sites, ranging from 2.5 female~ and 517 fry per m at Railroad Creek to 0.12 females and 3.6 fry perm at Hopedale Slough. The relationship of fry production to spawning density indicates that a density greater than 0.5 females-per m2 does not appreciably increase fry production (Fig. 28). Railroad Creek, which accommodated approximately 5 times as many female spawners per area as Worth Creek, produced only 15% more fry per area (517 VS 450/m2). r l I .1 L N E a:: w CL (/) 1-z <I: a:: (.!) ~ w >-a:: IJ... 47 500 ---------------· 400 300 200 100 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 FEMALE SPAWNERS PER m 2 FIG. 28. Relationship between the number of female chum salmon spawners and the number of chum fry emigrants per m2 of utilized spawning area at study sites. The curve is fitted by eye. OTHER FISH SPECIES The abundance of species other than chum salmon was recorded incidentally at all sites but Billy Harris Slough. Coho Salmon Numbers of coho salmon adults, fry and smolts observed at the various sites are compared in Table 8. Significant numbers of adult coho were encountered only at Judd Slough, Lower Paradise channel and Worth Creek. 48 TABLE 7. 2 Density of chum salmon spawning and fry production per m of developed spawning area. Developed Utilized No. of Potential Egg Fry Study Site Area (m 2 ) Area (m2)a Females Deposition Production Judd Slough ll' 610 5' 770 0.13 426 73 (.26) (857) (146) Judd Slough 560 270 o. 12 393 67 Pond 2 (. 24) (815) (139) Lower Paradise 2,040 1,230 o. 24 767 161 (. 40) (1,272) (267) Worth Creek 840 840 0.46 1,342 450 Railroad Creek 660 660 2.47 7,252 517 Hopedale Slough 1,670 1,085 o. 12 351 3.6 Pond 1 (. 18) (541) ( 5. 5) Billy Harris 7,480 b 0.33 1, 166 206 Slough aArea utilized by 95% of spawning population. Figures in brackets represent numbers per area actually utilized. b Spawner distribution surveys were not conducted at this site. As no tagging was conducted to measure the actual recovery rate of coho carcasses, the number of carcasses recorded at each site should be considered only a minimum estimate of spawning population. Some spawning also took place after our carcass recovery surveys were terminated in early to mid-January. Recoveries of coho carcasses started in late November and peaked during the December 24 -January 3 period, depending on site. The peak of coho fry emigration occurred during April at Squamish sites and during late April and May at Worth Creek. Coho smelt migration timing varied between locations, peaking in late March -early April at Lower Paradise, in May at Judd Slough and in late May at Hopedale Slough. Other Salmon Species Four sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) carcasses were recovered from Hopedale Slough Pond 1 during late December. At Lower Paradise 4 chinook salmon (Q. tshawytscha) fry were caught in the downstream migrant traps. [ - I r I r~- l - TABLE 8. ComparaLive abundance of adult and juvenile coho salmon at study sites. Study Site Adult Dead Count Estimated Fry Total Male Female Total Emigration Smolt Catchb Judd Slough 32 18 so 26,000 324 Judd Slough 3 0 3 1,500 11 Pond 2 Lmve r Paradise 15 9 24 8,600 215 Horth Creek 36 35 71 29' 100 81 Railroad Creek 4 0 4 190 11 Hopedale Slough 1 7 8 120 175 Pond 1 aEstimate based on assumption that trap efficiency for coho fry is the same as that measured for chum fry. bActual catch with no adjustment for non-fishing days or trap efficiency. TABLE 9. Total catches of trout and non-salmonid fish species in downstream migrant traps. Study Site Trout Three-spine Stickleback Sculpin Lamprey Judd Slough 11 8 9 28 Judd Slough 0 0 0 2 Pond 2 Lower Paradise 12 0 0 1 Horth Creek 10 2 1089 4 Railroad Creek 10 15 373 0 Hopedale Slough 23 1860 87 84 so As no adult chinook were observed to spawn in the channel it seems likely that these fry had immigrated from the Cheakamus River before traps were installed on March 10. Trout Trout fingerlings (Salmo sp.), likely yearlings in most cases, were taken in the downstream migrant traps at all sites but Judd Slough Pond 2 (Table 9). As the numbers of trout were relatively low at all sites, no differentiation of species was attempted. Non-Salmon ids Catches of non-salmonid fish species in downstream migrant traps are presented in Table 9. Non-salmonids were much more abundant at Fraser Valley sites than at Squamish. Relatively large catches of sculpins (Cottus sp.) were made at Worth and Railroad creeks. Significant numbers of three-spine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus) were only encountered at Hopedale Slough. Lamprey were not identified as to species. r I __ .,! J 51 DISCUSSION The following discussion concentrates on the more important findings pertaining to chum salmon. SURVIVAL RATE COMPARISON In this study chum salmon egg-to-fry survival averaged 16.3%, approximately twice the average (7.9%) documented at six natural spawning areas in British Columbia (Table 10). Survival rates at Worth Creek (33.5%) and Lower Paradise (20.7%) exceeded egg-to-fry survivals previously reported for chum salmon under natural conditions; and compared favourably with the average survival (27%) achieved with controlled flow at Big Qualicum River on Vancouver Island (E. A. Perry, pers. comm.). FACTORS AFFECTING SURVIVAL High spawning density probably reduced egg-to-fry survival of chums at Railroad Creek, but it was not clearly a factor at other sites (Fig. 28). Potential egg deposition at Railroad Creek (7300 eggs/m2) approximated 3 times the optimum (2300 eggs/m2) indicated for chum and pink (Oncorhynchus gorbuscha) salmon in studies at Sashin Creek, Alaska (McNeil, 1969). Thorsteinson (1965) found that with a potential egg deposition of 6,000 eggs per m2, mortality of chum and pink salmon eggs at spawning amounted to 45%. Though excessive spawning density may have caused the low survival (7.1%) at Railroad Creek, it could not be implicated at Hopedale Slough where survival was 1% despite the lowest spawning density of any site. At 5 of the 7 study sites native gravel was replaced with artificial grades of spawning gravel (cobbles and fine material removed) to improve conditions for egg incubation. Based on experiments relating chum salmon egg-to-fry survival to the proportion of fine material in spawning gravel (Koski, 1971) we would have expected the use of graded gravel to improve survival"rates. However, the advantages of a graded gravel substrate were not clear from the survival data (Table 6). The highest (33.5%) and lowest (1%) survivals occurred at Worth Creek and Hopedale Slough where artificial grades of gravel were added. The sites with the native spawning bed material, Lower Paradise and Judd Slough, produced relatively high survivals of 20.7% and 17.1% respectively. Any benefits of graded spawning gravel' may well have been obscured in this study by other factors which could have affected survival, such as spawning density and differences in physical characteristics of the various sites, eg. gradient, groundwater flow and quality, extent of back- watering. FRY PRODUCTION PER AREA The highest production of chum salmon fry per area occurred at Railroad (517 fry/m2 ) and Worth (450 fry/m 2 ) creeks, the sites which experienced the highest spawning densities. Though these values are significantly 52 TABLE 10. Comparison of chum salmon survival (from potential egg deposition to fry emigration) in the present study with survival rates recorded at natural spawning areas in British Columbia. Study Site Survival Rate No. of Investigator(s) Mean Range Observations Groundwater-fed 16.3/o 1-33.5% 7 Present study side channels Nile Creek 2 • 2/o 0.4-6% 5 Neave, 1953 Hooknose Creek 9.4% 1-19.4% 10 Hunter, 1959 Big Qualicum 11. 2/o 5-17% 4 Lister & River Walker, 1966 Harrison River 6.9% 5.1-7.4°fo 3 Dietz, MS 1968 tributaries Inches Creek 5.5% 1.6-9.3% 4 Fedorenko & Bailey, 1980 Barnes Creek 12.3/o 4.6-18.8/o 4 Fedorenko & Bailey, 1980 below the 1600 fry per m2 achievable in an artificial spawning channel for chum salmon (Fisheries & Environment Canada, 1978), they do compare with maxima observed at natural spawning areas supporting mixed populations of chum and pink salmon. McNeil (1969) reported up to 463 fry per m2 migrating from Sashin Creek, and Hunter (1959) estimated the upper limit of fry 2 production at Hooknose Creek, British Columbia, to approximate 330 per m . Fry production per area did not increase appreciably when spawning density exceeded 0.5 females/m2. Though Railroad Creek accommodated 5 times as many female spawners per area as Worth Creek (2.5/m2 versus 0.5/m2) it produced only 15% more fry per area. r~ l f l r l 53 REDO SAMPLING In February, 1980, Department of Fisheries and Oceans personnel conducted hydraulic sampling of chum sRlmon redds to compare survival at the study sites and to der.crminC' wheLht•r hydraulic sampling results, ic. the ratio of live to dead embryos, could be used as an index of survival from potential egg deposition to fry migration (Comfort, MS 1980). Most chum salmon embryos had either hatched or reached the advanced eyed stage at the time of sampling. The overall percentages of live embryos at each site are shown in the following table: Judd Judd Lower Worth Railroad Hopedale Billy Slough Slough Paradise Creek Creek Slough Harris Pond 2 Slough 88/o 64/o 88/o 86% 36/o 23/o 48/o Fig. 29 relates the percentage of live embryos in sampled redds to egg- to-fry survival at a given site. Where graded spawning gravel had been added, survival was iignificantly correlated (r= .97; P =<.Ol) with the percentage of live embryos in redds. However, survival in native spawning bed material at Judd Slough and Lower Paradise did not reflect the high proportion of live embryos found in redd sampling. Two possible explanations for this anomaly are: (i) a higher percentage of eggs deposited in the natural bed material was dislodged during spawning and therefore did not appear as dead eggs in the February redd sampling (under similar circumstances the greater void area in the artificially graded gravel may serve to retain eggs that would otherwise be dislodged by later- spawning waves of salmon); or (ii) post-hatching mortality was higher in the natural spawning bed material than in the graded gravel. In case (i) mortality due to superimposition and dislodging of eggs is not fully accounted for in the redd sampling. FRY MIGRANT SIZE Post-emergent stream rearing of chum salmon fry before seaward migration has been observed in several previous British Columbia studies (Sparrow, 1968; Fraser et al, 1978). In the present study, chum fry migrants with obvious post-emergence growth were most common at Fraser Valley sites, particularly at Railroad Creek and Hopedale Slough. The pond-like conditions at these sites may have reinforced the tendency of some fry to rear for a period before emigrating. ~ ..J ~ > 0:: :::> C/) >- 0:: LL. 0 ..... (.!) (.!) w 54 0 30 • 20 0 0 • 10 0 / 0 20 40 60 80 % LIVE EMBRYOS IN REDDS FIG. 29. Relationship between the percentage of live chum salmon embryos determined from redd sampling and survival from potential egg deposition to fry emigration at study sites. Open circles denote sites where graded gravel substrate was added; solid circles denote sites with the native spawning bed material. Regression line is fitted to the open circles. At the Squamish area study sites chum fry of a given length class were shown to increase in weight as the migration progressed. The bimodality we observed in weight frequency distribution during peak migration has not, to our knowledge, been previously reported. Barns (1974) used the length- weight relationship of pink salmon fry migrants to demonstrate their stage of embryonic development, with greater weight at a given length indicating higher yolk content and thus an earlier stage of development. He reported that among naturally produced fry weight at a given length declined as migration progressed, opposite to the trend we observed in chum fry at Squamish. We can only speculate that the seasonal changes in the length-weight relationship noted in this study mdy have been due to differences in the extent of feeding ~mong chum fry migrants, either within or above the gravel, at different stages of migration. [ I I ~ -~ j J l ' I j 55 Chum fry migrants at Squamish study sites were larger over the season than fry at the Fraser Valley sites (mean weight of 344 mg versus 327 mg). This difference in fry size may have been related to the greater age and size of female chum salmon at Squamish, perhaps through larger egg size. Koski (1966) observed a positive correlation between the size of coho salmon fry at emergence ~nd size of parent females. SUMMARY 1. A study was co11ducted during November, 1979 to June, 1980 to assess chum salmon spawning, incubation survival and fry production in groundwater- fed spawning areas which had been developed or improved to enhance salmon production. The seven study sites were situated on the lower mainland of southern British Columbia, three near Squamish and four in the Fraser River valley. 2. At each site the chum salmon spawning population was estimated by tag- and-recovery and chum fry emigration was determined by total enumeration. Information was also obtained on chum spawning time and distribution, spawner age and size, fry size and migration timing, and utilization of the areas by other fish species. ~ 3. Chum spawning took place between late October and mid-January, and peaked at most study sites during December 1 -15. Age groups 3, 4 and 5 were present in all escapements; age 4 fish comprised the majority at all but one site. Chum spawners at Squamish area sites were older and larger for a given age than spawners at Fraser Valley sites. 4.). The estimated escapement of chum salmon to individual study sites ranged from 479 to 6572 fish. Seasonal spawning density was 0.5 females/m 2 or less at all but one site, where it was estimated at 2.5 females/m2. 5. Chum salmon fry emigrated from the study areas between early March and mid-June. At 5 of the 7 study sites the date of 50% migration occurred during the April 14-30 period. 6. The estimated migration of chum fry from individual study sites ranged from 6,000 to 1,543,000. Maximum fry production per unit of spawning area was estimated at 517/m2 . The relationship between spawner density and fry production indicated that fry output per area did not increase appreciably at spawning densities exceeding 0.5 females/m 2 . 7. Over the migration period chum fry were larger on the average at Squamish than in the Fraser Valley, possibly the result of the larger size of female spawners at Squamish. Individual fry weight varied more at Fraser Valley sites due to the presence of fry which had achieved considerable growth before seaward migration. 8. 56 Chum salmon survival from potential egg deposition to fry migration ranged from l% to 33.5% at individual study sites. The average survival (16.3%) at the seven sites was approximately twice that recorded for chum salmon at natural spawning areas in British Columbia. 9. Examination of factors potentially affec~ing survival indicated that excessive spawner density (2.5 females/m ) probably reduced egg-to- fry survival at one site. The advantages of a graded gravel spa~ning substrate, whicl1 had been added to 5 of the 7 sites, were not apparent from the survival data. However, between-site differences in spawner density and other physical characteristics may have obscured the effect of substrate character. 10. Coho salmon used all study sites for spawning and rearing. Small numbers of juvenile trout were captured at all but one site, as were stickleback, sculpin and lamprey. r ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS l ~ We are grateful to a number of individuals for assistance in carrying out this project. Cy Walsh fabricated and installed the adult salmon fences f~ and downstream migrant traps at all study sites. Dennis Demontier recorded l adult salmon spawning distribution and provided measurements of the study sites. Data from the Billy Harris Slough project were provided by Wilfred Leon of the Chehalis Indian Band and Linda Patterson, the project coordinator. Gerald Harris of D.B. Lister & Associates Ltd. organized and participated in the adult salmon study. We also appreciate the assistance of the field crew, particularly Dave Moore, Edgar Stowards, Janice Howie and Allen Lewis. Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd., consulting engineers, drafted figures for the report. 57 REHRE~~CES ANON. 1961. Big Qualicum River biological survey, 1959-60. Dept. of Fisheries. V;Jncouvcr, 40 p. 1962. Big Qualicum River biological survey, 1960-61. Dept. of Fisheries, Vancouver, 46 p. AR~1STRONG, R.W. and A.lv. ARGUE. of wild coho ;JJJd chinook juveniles 1975. Fish. Mar. Serv. Tech. Rep. Trapping and coded-wire tagging from the Cowichan River system, Ser. PAC/T-77-14, Vancouver, 58 p. BAMS, R.A. 1974. Gravel incubators: a second evaluation on pink salmon, Oncorhynchus gorbuscha, including adult returns. J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 31: 1379-1385. BRO\-JN, R.F. and~!.~!. MUSGRAVE. 1979. Preliminary catalogue of salmon streams and spawning escapements of Mission-Harrison Sub-District. Fish. Mar. Serv. Data Rep. 133: 151 p. COMFORT, M.J. MS 1980. 1980 hydraulic sampling of selected areas. Unpubl. Memorandum Rep., Dept. of Fisheries & Oceans, Vancouver, 4 p. + appendices. DIETZ, K.G. MS 1968. Chum salmon survival in three tributaries of the Harrison River. Unpubl. Memorandum Rep. (File No. 31-1-H9). Dept. of Fisheries & Oceans, Vancouver, 5 p. FEDORENKO. A.Y. and D.D. BAILEY. 1980. 1970-1978. Fish. Mar. Serv. MS Rep. Inches Creek chum pilot project, 1562: 47 p. FISHERIES and ENVIRONMENT, CANADA 1978. Salmonid enhancement program, annual report, 1977. Vancouver, 84 p. FRASER, F.J., D. D. BAILEY and M.J. WOOD. 1978. Big Qualicum River Salmon Development Project (Volume III): Experimental rearing of chum salmon juveniles (Oncorhynchus keta) in fresh water (1968-1970). Fish. Mar. Serv. Tech. Rep. 572: 22 p. HUNTER, J.G. 1959. Survival and production of pink and chum salmon in a coastal stream. J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 16: 835-886. KOSKI, K.V. 1966. The survival of coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) from egg deposition to emergence in three Oregon coastal streams. M.S. Thesis, Oregon State Univ., Corvallis, 84 p. 1971. Big Beef Creek studies. In 1970 Research in Fisheries, College of Fisheries, Univ. of Washing·ton, Seattle, 66 p. LISTER, D.B. and C.E. WALKER. 1966. The effect of flow control on fresh- water survival of chum, coho and chinook salmon in the Big Qualicum River. Can. Fish Culturist 37: 3-25. 58 LISTER, D.B. and R.A.L. HARVEY. 1969. Loss of Petersen disk tags from spawning chum salmon (Oncorhynchus keta). Can. Fish Culturist 40: 33-40. LISTER, D.B., G.D. HARRIS and D.G. IIICKEY. MS 1979. Juvenile salmon downstream migration study at Little Qualicum River, British Columbia. Prepared for Dept. of Fisheries & Oceans, Vancouver, 44 p. + appendices. MARSHALL, D.E ., C.I. MANZON and E.W. BRITTON. 1980. Catalogue of salmon streams and spawning escapements of Chilliwack-Hope Subdistrict. Can. Aquat. Sci. Data Rep. 203; 167 p. MARSHALL, D.E. and R.F. BROWN. MS 1977. Proposed chum salmon enhancement at Judd Slough, a side channel of the Squamish River. Unpubl. report, Dept. of Fisheries & Oceans, Vancouver, 16 p. + appendices. MCNEIL, W.J. 1964. spawning beds. Redd superimposition and egg capacity of pink salmon J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 21: 1385-1396. 1969. Survival of pink and chum salmon eggs and alevins. In T.G. Northcote (ed.), H.R. MacMillan Lectures in Fisheries, Univ. of British Columbia, Vancouver, B~C. MINAKER, B.A., F.K. SANDERCOCK, and L.I. BALMER. 1979. Project, 1974-1975. Fish Mar. Serv. Man. Rep. 1528: Big Qualicum River 131 p. NEAVE, F. 1953. Principles affecting the size of pink and chum salmon populations in British Columbia. J. Fish. Res. Board Can. ~: 450-491. PAINE, J.R., F.K. SANDERCOCK and B.A. MINAKER. 1975. Big Qualicum River project, 1972-1973. Fish. Mar. Serv. Tech. Rep. Ser. No. PAC/T -75-15, Vancouver, 126 p. PERRY, E.A. 1980. Personal communication. Biologist, Dept. of Fisheries & Oceans, Vancouver. PALMER, R.N. 1972. Fraser River chum salmon. Fish. Serv. Tech. Rep. 1972-1, Vancouver, 284 p. RICKER, W.E. 1975. Computation and interpretation of biological statistics of fish populations. Bull. Fish. Res. Board Can. 191: 382 p. SANDERCOCK, F.K. and B.A. MINAKER. 1975. Big Qualicum River project, 1973-74. ·Fish. Mar. Serv. Tech. Rep. Ser. No. PAC/T -75-16, Vancouver, 120 p. SIEGEL, S. 1956. Non parametric Statistics. McGraw-Hill, New York. SPARROW, R.A.H. 1968. A first report of chum salmon fry feeding in fresh- water of British Columbia. J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 25: 599-602. THORSTEINSON, F.V. 1965. Some aspects of pink and chum salmon research at Olsen Bay, Prince William S6und. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Man. Rep. MR 65-3, Auke Bay, Alaska, 30 p. f L_ i\PP END ICES APPENDIX A SPOT TEMPERATURES (°C) TAKEN IN JUDD SLOUGH AND SQUAMISH RIVER, NOVEMBER, 1979 TO JANUARY, 1980. Date Nov. 16 Nov. 20 Nov. 23 Nov. 29 Dec. 5 Dec. 10 Dec. 14 Dec. 19 Dec. 24 Dec. 28 Jan. 3 Jan 13 Abo'.(e Pond 1 Yonc1s 5.0 7.0 5.0 6.0 3.5 4.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 4.0 6.0 6.0 7.0 7.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 7.0 7.0 Judd Slough Site~ Squamish R. Pond 2 Bridge 7.0 7.0 7.0 6.0 6.0 4.0 5.5 6.0 5.0 3.0 6.0 5.0 6.0 2.0 7.0 6.0 4.5 7.0 7.0 8.0 5.0 3.5 7.0 7.0 8.0 7.5 4.0 6.0 7.0 6.0 6.5 6.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 2.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 3.0 7.0 6.0 6.5 6.0 4.0 8.0 7.5 2.5 I I [ APPENDIX B DAILY TEi'1PERi\TURE (° C) OF JUDD SLOUGH, JUDD POND 2 AND SQUAMISH RIVER, MARCH TO MAY, 1980. Date Judd Slough Max. Min. Mean Mar. 13 14 17 9.0 7.0 8.0 18 8.0 7.0 7.5 20 8.0 7.0 7.5 21 10.0 7.0 8.5 24 10.0 7.0 8.5 25 9.0 7.0 8.0 27 9.0 7.0 8.0 Apr. 2 10.0 7.0 8.5 3 10.0 6.0 8.0 8 9.0 9.0 9.0 9 10.0 8.0 9.0 10 8.0 8.0 8.0 11 8.5 5.0 6.75 14 8.0 8.0 8.0 15 8.0 8.0 8.0 16 9.0 7.0 8.0 17 10.0 7.0 8.5 18 11.0 8.0 9.5 21 8.5 5.0 6.75 22 14.0 6.0 10.0 23 10.0 9.0 9.5 24 10.0 8.0 9.0 25 10.0 9.0 9.5 28 9.0 8.0 8.5 29 9.0 9.0 9.0 30 10.0 8.0 9.0 May 1 8.0 8.0 s.o 2 9.0 9.0 9.0 5 11.5 7.0 9.25 6 8.0 8.0 8.0 7 11.0 7.0 9.0 8 11.0 8.0 9.5 9 9.0 9.0 9.0 12 9.0 9.0 9.0 13 9.0 8.0 8.5 14 9.0 8.0 8.5 15 9.0 9.0 9.0 16 9.0 8.5 8. 75 Judd Pond 2 Max. Min. Mean 7. 0 6.0 6.5 7. 0 6.0 6.5 7.0 6.0 6.5 12.0 6.0 9.0 7.0 6.0 6.5 7.0 6.0 6.5 8.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 5.0 6.5 7.0 6.0 6.5 8.0 6.0 7.0 9.0 5.0 7.0 9.0 7.0 8.0 10.0 5.0 7.5 8.0 5.0 6.5 10.0 6.0 8.0 8.0 7.0 7.5 9.0 7.0 8.0 9.5 6.0 7. 75 9.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 8.0 8.5 9.0 7. 0 8.0 8.0 7.0 7.5 9.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 7.0 8.0 10.0 7.0 8.5 9.0 7.0 8.0 7.5 7.0 7.25 8.0 7.0 7.5 10.0 7.0 8.5 10.0 7.0 8.5 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 7.0 7.5 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.5 7.0 7.25 8.0 8.0 8.0 7.5 7.0 7.25 Squamish River t<1ax. Min. Mean 8.0 7.0 7.5 6.0 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.0 6.0 7.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 6.5 6.75 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 8.0 7.0 7.5 APPENDIX C SPOT TEMPERATURES (°C) TAKEN IN LOWER PARADISE CHANNEL AND CHEAKAMUS RIVER, NOVEMBER, 1979 TO JANUARY, 1980. Date Lower Cheakamus Paradise River Nov. 16 7.5 6.0 Nov. 20 7.0 8.0 Nov. 26 6.0 4.0 Nov. 29 6.0 3.5 Dec. 6 7.0 5.0 Dec. 11 7.0 4.0 Dec. 15 6.5 2.5 Dec. 19 7.0 4.5 Dec. 24 6.0 4.0 Dec. 28 6.0 4.0 Jan. 3 7.0 5.0 . Jan. 13 8. 0 . 6.0 r L r- I l-~ APPENDIX D DAlLY Te1PER1\TURE (0 C) OF LO\.JER PARADISE CHANNEL Ai\D CHEAKAHUS RIVER, t-1ARCH TO MAY, 1980. Date Lower Paradise Channel Cheakamus River Max. Min. Mean Max. Min. Mean rrar. 13 7.0 5.0 6.0 14 7.0 5.0 6.0 17 8.0 6.0 7.0 18 7.0 7.0 7.0 20 10.0 7.0 8.5 21 11.0 6.0 8.5 24 9.0 5.0 7.0 25 11.0 fl. 0 7.5 27 8.0 5.0 6.5 Apr. 2 7.0 5.0 6.0 3 14.0 5.0 9.5 8 10.0 7.0 8.5 9 9.0 5.0 7.0 10 10.0 6.0 8.0 11 11.0 7.0 9.0 12 11.0 7.0 9.0 13 10.0 7.0 8.5 14 8.0 8.0 8.0 15 9.0 7.0 8.0 16 9.0 6.0 7.5 17 18 21 9.0 7.0 8.0 22 8.0 6.0 7.0 23 9.0 6.0 7.5 24 9.0 7.0 8.0 25 10.0 6.0 8.0 7.0 5.0 6.0 28 9.0 7.0 8.0 7.5 5.5 6.5 29 10.0 6.5 8.25 6.0 6.0 6.0 30 10.0 6.5 8.25 8.0 5.0 6.5 May 1 11.0 5.0 8.0 8.0 6.0 7.0 2 11.0 7.0 9.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 5 9.0 6.0 7.5 8.0 5.0 6.5 6 9.0 7.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 6.5 7 9.0 7.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 6.5 8 9.5 6.5 8.0 7.5 6.0 6.75 9 9.0 7.0 8.0 8.0 6.0 7.0 12 10.0 6.0 8.0 7.5 6.0 6. 75 13 8.0 7.0 7.5 6.0 4.0 5.0 14 9.0 7.0 8.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 15 9.5 8.5 9.0 7.0 6.0 6.5 16 9.5 8.5 9.0 6.0 5.0 5.5 APPENDIX E Date Nov. 9 Nov. 15 Nov. 23 Nov. 28 Dec. 3 Dec. 7 Dec. 12 Dec. 17 Dec. 21 Dec. 27 Jan. 2 Jan. 9 Jan. 15 Jan. 17 SPOT TEMPERATURES (°C) TAKEN AT FRASER VALLEY STUDY SITES, NOVEMBER, 1979 TO JANUARY, 1980. Worth Norrish Railroad Nicomen Hopedale Vedder Creek Creek Creek Slough Slough River 14.0 7.0 11.0 11.0 10.0 14.0 6.0 11.0 8.0 11.0 9.0 13.0 6.0 9.0 8.0 11.5 4.0 8.0 7.0 8.0 4.5 11.0 5.5 8.0 7.0 8.5 5.5 11.0 5.5 9.0 7.0 8.0 5.5 12.0 4.0 9.0 5.5 7.0 5.5 9.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 10.0 5.0 6.5 6.0 5.0 9.0 4.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 8.5 5.0 8.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 7.0 0.0 6.0 -0.5 4.0 1.0 7.5 3.0 7.0 1.0 5.0 4.0 8.0 5.0 f I I l ' r l ' f : l [ APPENDIX F DAILY TEHPERATURES OF HOPEDALE SLOUGH AND VEDDER RIVER, r1ARCH TO 1:1AY, 1980. Date Hopedale Slough Vedder River Max. Min. Mean Max. Min. He an Har. 21 8.0 5.5 6.75 24 6.0 3.5 4.74 25 9.5 6.0 7.75 27 6.0 5.5 5.75 31 11.0 4.5 7.75 Apr. 1 11.0 6.5 8.75 3 11.0 5.0 8.00 4 11.0 5.5 8.25 7 12.0 6.0 9.00 8 10.5 5.0 7.75 9 11.0 6.0 9.5 10 12.0 6.5 9.25 11 13.0 6.0 9.5 14 11.5 7.0 9.25 15 11.0 7.5 9.25 16 9.5 7.0 8.25 17 13.0 7.5 10.25 18 10.0 7.5 8.25 21 9.5 6.0 7.75 22 10.0 8.0 9.0 23 8.5 6.0 7.25 24 12.0 8.0 10.0 25 12.0 7.5 9.75 28 12.0 7.0 9.5 30 12.0 7.0 9.5 May 1 11.0 8.0 9.5 2 13.0 9.0 11.0 5 21.0 8.0 14.5 6 11.0 7.0 9.0 7 10.0 -' 7.5 8.75 8 13.0 9.5 11.25 9 10.0 8.5 9.25 12 10.0 9.0 9.5 _. 13 10.0 9.0 9.5 14 10.0 8.5 9.25 15 10.0 9.0 9.5 16 10.0 9.0 9.5 19 12.0 10.0 11.0 20 8.5 8.0 8.25 21 9.0 8.0 8.25 __j 22 9.5 8.5 8.75 23 9.5 8.5 9.0 26 13.0 8.5 10.75 10.0 9.0 9.5 CJ APPENDIX F (cont.) Date Hopedale Slough Vedder River Max. Min. Mean Max. Min. Mean 27 9.5 8.5 9.0 28 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 9.5 9.75 29 15.0 10.0 12.5 30 11.5 10.0 10.75 10.5 9.0 9.75 June 1 10.0 9.0 9.5 2 10.0 9.0 9.5 10.0 9.0 9.5 3 10.0 9.0 9.5 4 11.0 10.0 10.5 11.0 10.0 10.5 5 10.0 9.0 9.5 11.0 10.0 10.5 8 15.0 10.0 12.5 9 13.0 11.0 12.0 15.0 9.5 12.25 f . ! 10 19.0 11.0 15.0 t I . I [ r I . APPENDIX G DAILY TEHPERATURES OF WORTH, RAILROAD AND NORRISH CREEKS, ~L\RCH TO l'fAY, 1980. Date \~orth Creek Railroad Creek Norrish Creek Max. Hin. He an Hax. l'lin. He an Hax. Min. Mean Har. 12 12 6 9 13 9 5 7 14 9 5 7 17 8 5 6.5 18 7 5 6 20 9 5 7 21 6 5 5.5 23 8 6 7 24 7 5 6 7 5 6 25 6 5 5.5 7 7 7 27 5.5 5 5.25 7 5 6 28 7 4.5 5. 75 7 6 6.5 31 8 6 7 8 7 7.5 Apr. 1 7 5.5 6.25 9 7 8 3 13 4.5 8. 75 8 7 7.5 4 7 4 5.5 14 8 11 7 13 9 11 14 8 11 8 10 3 6.5 8 8 8 9 10 5 7.5 8 5 6.5 10 10.5 5.5 8 9 5 7 11 7 5 6 10 4 7 14 12 5 8.5 11 8 9.5 15 8 5.5 6.75 11 8.5 9. 75 16 7 5 6 9 7 8 17 9 5 7 10 3 6.5 18 9 5 7 10 7.5 8. 75 19 9 8 8.5 20 8 8 8 21 7 5 6 10 7 8.5 22 10 6 8 10 7 8.5 23 11 6 8.5 10 8 9 24 9 6 7.5 12 9 10.5 25 11 4.5 7.75 12 7 9.5 28 15 5 10 19 7 13 30 12 7 9.5 14 5 9.5 May 1 ' 9 6 7.5 9 6 7.5 2 18 6 12 21 9.5 15.25 3 18 5 ll. 5 6 16 6 11 7 13 6 9.5 8 15 7 11 9 10 6 8 10 5 7.5 12 12 7 9.5 13 9 5.5 7.25 14 10 5.5 7. 75 15 7 6 6.5 16 7 5 6 10.5 5 7.75 19 14 7 10.5 ~ l APPENDIX G (cont.) I Date Worth Creek Railroad Creek Norrish Creek Hax. Min. He an Max. Min. Mean Max. Min. Mean Hay 20 10 6 8 21 7 6 6.5 22 8 6 7 23 7 6 6.5 12 5 8.5 26 13 7 10 27 13 7 10 28 13 6 9.5 29 11 7 9 30 13 6 9.5 15 5 10 June 2 7 7 7 3 10 6 8 4 12 7 9.5 I 5 12 6 9 l 6 14 5 9.5 9 15 7 11 [ ' 10 16 8 12 I 13 15 8 11.5 I , l_ APPENDIX H SPAin\ING BED COHPOSITION AT STUDY SITES EXPRESSED AS PERCENT BY \·JEIGHT PASSli';'G A GIVEN SIEVE SIZE. Sieve Judd Judd Slough Lower Paradise Harth Railroad Hopedale Size Slough Pond 2 Channel Creek Creek Slough Pond 1 4 in. 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 3 100.0 98.3 97.6 100.0 100.0 90.6 2 89.9 88.5 91.0 98.2 97.6 80.2 1 1/2 71.9 69.9 77.8 91.5 86.4 72.1 49.1 27.6 59.6 53.3 49.3 45.6 3/4 39.3 7.8 51.2 28.9 24.8 31.6 1/2 30.9 0. 7 43.5 4.9 4.2 25.1 3/8 25.2 35.7 1.0 0.7 21.4 II 4 17.5 25.5 17.2 If 8 13.6 19.6 14.9 II 16 9.7 14.6 12.8 }( 30 5.9 8. 7 10.2 71 II so 2.8 2.6 4.8 II 100 o. 7 0.4 0.9 II 200 0. 3. 0. 1 0.2 APPENDIX I SUMMARY OF ADULT CHUM SALMON TAGGING AND RECOVERY DATA FROM SIX STUDY SITES, NOVE:t·'lBER, 1979 TO JANUARY, 1980. No. Tagged No. Recovered Percent Recovery Study Site Tagging Date Male Female Male Female Male Female Judd Slough Nov. 27 74 76 53 65 71.6 85.5 (including tag recoveries from Dec. 6 26 42 17 37 65.4 88.1 ponds 1 & 2) 100 118 70 102 Judd Slough Nov. 27 20 21 11 19 55.0 90.5 Pond 2 Dec. 6 21 15 15 13 71.4 86.7 41 36 26 32 Lower Paradise Nov. 21 34 37 22 22 64.7 59.5 Nov. 30 45 19 37 19 82.2 100.0 Dec. 11 22 55 17 42 77.3 76.4 101 111 76 83 Worth Creek Dec. 17 37 43 19 35 51.4 81.4 Railroad Creek Nov. 23 so 34 49 33 98.1 97.1 Dec. 13 so 85 41 62 82.0 72.9 100 119 90 95 Hopedale Slough Nov. 17 21 20 21 20 100.0 100.0 Pond 1 Dec. 13 44 32 1S 2S 34.1 78.1 65 52 36 45 APPENDIX J SlJM¥..ARY OF CHUM SALMON Cl1.RCA.SS RECOVERY DATA AND POPULATION ESTIMATES AT SIX STUDY SITES, NOVEHBER 1979 TO JA.'WARY, 1980. 95% CONFIDENCE INTERVALS FOR POPULATION ESTIMATES ARE SHOWN IN BRACKETS. No. of Carcasses Examined Po:eulation Estimates Study Site Recovery Period Male Female Total Male Female Total Judd Slougha Nov. 16 -Jan. 13 1248 1387 2635 1775 1602 3377 (1369 -2181) (1296 -1908) (2665 -4089) Judd Slough Nov. 16 Jan. 13 112 58 170 176 66 242 Pond 2 (115 -257) (45 -93) ( 160 -350) Lower Paradise Nov. 16 -30 146 79 225 224 132 356 Channel (141 -338) (83 -199) (224 -537) Dec. 1 -11 160 104 264 195 105 300 (137 -269) (64 -164) (20 1 -433) Dec. 12 -Jan. 13 352 192 544 451 251 702 (263 -722) (163 -369) (426 -1091) 658 375 1033 870 488 1358 (541 -1329) (310 -732) (851 -2061) Worth Creek Nov. 9 -Jan. 17 349 313 662 665 384 1049 (403 -1036) (267 -534) (670 -15 70) Railroad Creek Nov. 9 -Dec. 12 440 377 817b 469 403 872 (354 -631) (277-565) (631 -1196) Dec. 13 -27 755 739 1494 918 1010 1928 (658 -1245) (756 -1264) (1414 -2509) Dec. 28 -Jan. 17 168 211 379 1711 217 388 (129 -230) ( 149 -304) (278 .,.. 534) 1363 1327 2690 1558 1630 3188 (1141 -2106) (1182 -2133) (2323 -4233) Hopedale Slough Nov. 2 -17 57 62 119b 70 78 148 Pond 1 (44 -107) (48 -120) (92 -227) Nov. 18 -Dec. 12 86 53 139 87 54 141 (54 -133) (33 -83) (87 -216) Dec. 13 -28 37 28 65 107 37 144 (60 -177) (24 -54) (84 -231) Dec. 29 -Jan. 19 14 30 44 15 31 46 (9 -23) (19 -48) (28 -71) 194 173 367 279 200 479 (167 -440) (124 -305) (291 -745) a Study site includes all of Judd Slough, tributaries and Ponds and 2. --•'. b Numbers adjusted for estimated loss before fence installation. r "I',. '1 l" r• APPENDIX K LENGTH AND FECUNDITY DATA FROM A SAMPLE OF Zl FEMALE CHUM SALMON, LOWER PARADISE CHANNEL, 1979. Collection Orbital-hypural No. of eggs Date length(cm) Dec. 7 61.0 960a 8 66.5 3660 8 65.5 4220 8 66.5 1885a 8 62.5 2090a 8 50.5 990a 9 60.0 3360 9 66.5 2930 9 56.5 3330 9 56.5 3360 9 59.5 3710 9 59.5 3060 9 64.5 3480 9 64.5 4460 9 58.5 2970· 9 49.5 2540 9 55 . .) 2690 9 58.5 3630 9 54.5 2700 9 52.0 2480 9 56.0 2880 aRejected from length-fecundity regression sample because of suspected partial spawning prior to capture. r~ l I : APPENDIX L RESULTS OF MARKED CHUM SALMON FRY RELEASES TO TEST TRAP EFFICIENCY AT STUDY SITES. Site kelease Release Date No. No. Percent No. of Traps No. Harked Recaptured R~capture Operating Judd Slough (Main Trap) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Judd Slough 1 Pond 2 2 3 4 5 Lower Paradise 1 Channel 2 3 4 5 Worth Creek 1 Railroad Creek Hopedale Slough Pond 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 1 2 April 14 21 23 28 30 Nay 5 7 12 15 21 Apri 1 15 22 28 May 6 13 April 10 14 21 28 May 6 April 12 21 29 May 6 13 19 26 April 8 14 17 22 April 24 May 5 293 497 1046 1988 199/l 449 978 493 880 83 294 300 325 383 318 298 298 999 500 719 49 97 298 998 499 498 200 299 294 94 147 49 50 47 182 195 965 782 132 228 101 527 2 218 183 196 332 299 280 289 1375 403 510 31 86 240 989 537 499 125 121 25 28 21 45 43 ---------------- a 16.0b 36.6 J8.6c 48.5c 39. 2c 29.6c c 23.3d 20.5 c 59.9f 2.4 74.lg 6l.Og 60.3g 86.7g 94.0 94.0 97. ohj 137.6. 80.6~ 70.9 1 63.3 88.7 80.5 99.1. 107. 6~ 100. 2J 62.5 40.5 8.5 29.8 44.7 91.8 86.0 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 a Only recoveries in Trap 3 used, to establish efficiency during early stages of migration when only Trap 3 was operated. b Test not used; fry released too close to traps for proper lateral distribution. c Tests used to establish efficiency with Traps 2 and 3 operating, with adjustment for difference in lateral distribution of marked fry. d Test not used; fry released prematurely, before peak migration. e Tests used to establish efficiency with all 3 traps operating, with adjustment for difference in lateral distribution of marked fry. f Test not used; release late in migration and fry did not return. g Tests not used; marked fry observed to take up residence in pond above trap. h Test not used; incorrect mark enumeration. i Test not used; debris clogged trap, causing fry loss. Recaptures estimated from total weight of fry and conversion samples providing number per weight. APPENDIX M SEASONAL TIMING OF CHUM SALMON CARCASS RECOVERY AT SQUAMISH AREA STUDY SITES, 1979-80. Judd Slough Judd Slough Pond 2 Lower Paradise Channel [ Sampling No. % No. % No. % Date recovered recovered recovered I I Nov. 16 1 0 28 2.7 I 20 19 0.7 0 28 2.7 I 23-26 74 2.8 1 0.6 87 8.4 29 106 4.0 9 5.2 82 7.9 L Dec. 5-6 397 15. 1 27 15.5 91 8.8 10-11 396 15.1 38 21.8 173 16.7 14-15 424 16.2 23 13.2 254 24.6 19 629 24.0 49 28.2 121 11.7 24 373 14.2 20 ll. 5 93 9.0 28 131 5.0 7 4.0 51 4.9 Jan. 3 68 2.6 0 25 2.4 13 4 0.2 0 0 Totals 2622 174 1033 APPENDIX N SEASONAL TIMIN"G OF CHilli SALMON CARCASS RECOVERY AT FRASER VALLEY STUDY SITES, 1979 -80. Sampling Date Nov. 2 9 15-17 23 28 DP.c. 3 7 12 17 2l 27 Jan. 2 9 15 17-19 Totals Worth Creek No. recovered 4 26 129 240 142 70 40 8 3 662 "I /o 0.6 3.9 19.5 36.3 21.5 10.6 6.0 1.2 o.s Railroad Creek No. recovered 7 25 80 132 136 170 267 73a 458a 963 255 85 35 4 2690 % 0.3 0.9 3.0 4.9 5. 1 fi.3 9.9 2.7 17.0 35.8 9.5 3.2 1.3 o. 1 Hopedale Slough Pond 1 No. recovered 65 54 82 27 9 22 12a 37 16 25 12 6 1 368 % 17. 7 14. 7 22.3 7.3 2.4 6.0 3.3 10. 1 4.3 6.8 3.3 1.6 0.3 a Fences flooded and/or high water prevented total carcass recovery. APPENDIX 0 LENGTH AND FECUNDITY DATA FROM A SAMPLE OF 15 FEMALE CHUM SALMON, BILLY HARRIS SLOUGH, 1979. Nose to Fork length(cm) No. of eggs 78 76 85 83 71 83 70 69 68 66 69 67 67 69 68 3,300 3,129 4,596 4,447 2, 724 3, 720 3,638 3,418 4,202 2,887 4,482 2, 101 4,109 3,731 2,058 I l . r [ r APPENDIX p LENGTH FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF CHUM SALMON BY AGE GROUP AT SQUAMISH AREA STUDY SITES IN 1979. Judd Slough Lower Paradise Channel Length Male Female Male Female (em) 3 4 5 3 4 5 3 4 5 3 4 5 49.5 l 50.0 l l 2 50.5 2 51.0 l 1 1 51.5 1 52.0 l 1 1 52.5 1 1 1 2 1 53.0 1 5 l 1 4 53.5 4 2 3 54.0 3 1 4 2 4 2 54.5 1 2 2 1 1 55.0 2 1 3 1 1 4 1 55.5 1 1 1 1 1 1 56.0 6 1 4 2 2 3 2 56.5 2 3 3 3 1 1 2 1 57.0 2 1 2 1 6 2 3 57.5 3 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 58.0 1 2 3 1 1 2 1 58.5 1 1 1 5 2 7 59.0 5 8 2 1 4 1 1 3 59.5 1 2 1 5 7 60.0 3 3 1 1 5 5 60.5 1 4 6 2 1 6 1 5 1 61.0 3 1 7 2 4 1 1 4 3 61.5 2 1 1 1 3 4 7 1 62.0 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 2 62.5 6 2 2 1 7 2 1 63.0 1 1 1 2 2 2 63.5 4 3 1 3 3 3 2 64.0 7 2 4 3 2 3 64.5 4 2 1 2 1 1 1 65.0 2 1 2 2 1 4 65.5 1 1 1 66.0 1 1 1 2 66.5 1 1 67.0 2 1 67.5 68.0' 1 1 68.5 1 69.0 1 1 1 69.5 70.0 70.5 71.0 71.5 1 Totals 22 58 18 28 51 20 34 67 21 31 72 18 r APPENDIX Q LENGTH FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF ADULT CHUM SALMON BY AGE GROUP AT FRASER VALLEY STUDY SITES IN 1979. Worth Creek Railroad Creek Hopedale Pond Length Male Female Male Female Male Female (em) 3 4 5 3 4 5 3 4 5 3 4 5 3 4 5 3 4 5 45.0 45.5 46.0 46.5 47.0 1 1 1 47.5 1 48.0 1 48.5 1 1 1 49.0 1 2 3 3 1 49.5 3 1 2 50.0 5 6 1 1 2 1 50.5 1 3 1 1 2 51.0 2 5 1 4 2 6 3 51.5 1 2 2 1 1 3 2 I 52.0 3 8 1 1 1 4 1 4 1 l -52.5 3 2 1 2 5 2 1 53.0 5 1 14 1 3 6 1 1 1 5 53.5 3 5 2 4 4 3 1 r 54.0 5 6 1 2 1 1 2 2 L_ 54.5 2 3 1 3 2 1 1 1 1 55.0 4 4 1 1 2 4 3 2 1 1 1 l~ 55.5 1 1 1 1 3 1 2 2 2 6 56.0 3 1 1 3 4 1 6 1 1 1 3 56.5 2 2 1 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 57.0 2 1 1 1 1 5 1 1 2 1 1 57.5 2 2 2 1 2 3 3 2 2 58.0 2 1 4 4 1 4 2 4 58.5 2 2 2 1 7 4 1 3 59.0 2 1 3 4 8 2 2 3 1 59.5 4 1 8 5 3 3 3 60.0 2 1 2 5 5 1 1 6 60.5 2 2 8 4 1 1 61.0 1 1 2 1 1 9 4 2 61.5 2 4 6 2 3 62.0 1 1 1 7 1 3 2 1 62.5 1 1 2 6 2 3 63.0 3 7 4 3 1 1 63.5 2 2 1 4 1 1 64.0 2 4 1 2 4 1 1 64.5 1 1 2 1 1 1 65.0 3 4 65.5 1 1 1 1 66.0 1 3 66.5 1 1 1 67.0 1 1 1 67.5 1 68.0 68.5 69.0 69.5 1 Totals 51 33 5 74 31 3 37 83 2 38 88 4 29 52 9 36 44 8 APPENDIX R RECOVERIES OF CHUM SALMON FIN-MARKED (Ad LV) AT INCHES CREEK IN WORTH AND RAILROAD CREEKS. Recovery Recovery Sex Length Age Location Date (1979-80) (em ) Worth Dec. 12 M. 52.5 3 Creek M. 51.0 M. 54.5 Dec. 17 F. 51.5 3 Dec. 27 F. 53.0 3 Jan. 15 F. 50.0 3 Railroad Dec. 27 F. 60.0 4 Creek F. 51.5 R* F. 51.0 3 Jan. 2 F. 52.0 3 F. 53.0 3 M. 51.5 3 M. 49.0 3 * ~ = regenerate scale. r-~ DAILY CATCH AND ESTIMATED MIGRATION OF CHUM SALMON FRY AT I APPENDIX S 1980 STUDY SITES. JUDD SLOUGH (MAIN TRAP) Date Catch Estimating Estimated Trap 1 Trap 2 Trap 3 Total Factor Migration March 12 0 0 0 0 13 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 15 0* 16 0* 17 0 0 0 18 0 0 0 19 6* 20 1 11 1 13 1.67a 22 21 0 0 0 11.11b 0 I 22 1 1 11. 11 11 23 1 1 11.11 11 L 24 11 8d 3 22 1.67 37 25 16 od 0 16 1.67 27 r I 26 21* I . 27 0 0 0 11.11 0 28 352* 29 462''< 30 6161< 31 704* April 1 3,435* 2 40 351 229 620 1. 67 1' 035 3 771 771 11. 11 8,566 4 5,186~~ 5 6,570* 6 7,431* 7 12,010* 8 670 1,902 995 3,567 1.67 5,957 9 21,506* 10 2,444 2,444 11.11 2 7' 15 3 11 2,827 2,827 11. 11 31,408 12 21,913* 13 15, 739* 14 646 646 11.11 7' 177 15 777 777 11. 11 8,632 16 2,177 2,177 11.11 24' 186 17 21,062* 18 7,160 2,542 9,702 2.71c 26,292 19 33,909* 20 35, 123* 21 4,894 4,894 11. 11 54,372 22 5,341 3, 775 9,116 2.71 24, 704 23 5, 936 5,181 11,117 2. 71 30,127 24 30, 972* APPENDIX S (cant.) Judd Slough Date April May Catch Estimating Estimated Trap 1 Trap 2 Trap 3 Total Factor Migration 25 10,095 3,959 14,054 2. 71 38,086 26 33,440* 27 37,263* 28 2,814 2, 814 11.11 31' 263 30 6,019 2,499 8,518 2. 71 23,084 1 4,994 1 '9 72 6,966 2. 71 18,878 2 6,521 2,408 8,929 2. 71 24,198 3 23,318* 4 19,299* 5 19,440* 6 2,419 2,419 11. 11 26' 877 7 2,244 429 2,673 2.71 7,244 8 2,521 225 2,746 2.71 7,442 9 1,544 848 2,392 2.71 6,482 10 5,378* 11 3,421* 12 199 199 11.11 2, 210 13 109 4L+6 385 940 1. 67 1' 5 70 14 36 268 239 543 1. 6 7 907 15 62 161 49 272 1. 6 7 454 16 262 649 175 1, 086 1. 6 7 1,814 17 759* 18 861* 19 543* 20 471* 21 341* 22 2 2 2 6 1. 67 10 Total 844,228 :Estimating factor for all 3 traps fishing (1.67). Estimating factor of 11.11 (recovery rate from Apr.15 release), using Trap 3 catch. c Estimating factor of 2.71 from average recovery rate in Traps 2 and 3 from 5 mark releases. d Trap 2 catch estimated from Trap 3 catch based on average ratio of 2. 55 : 1. * Interpolated data. APPENDIX S (cont.) JUDD SLOUGH POND 2 Date Catch Estimated Date Catch Estimated Migration Migration (Catch x 1.06) (catch x 1.06) March 12 0 0 April 21 721 764 13 0 0 22 458 485 14 0 0 23 898 952 15 o~· 24 301 319 16 0>'< 25 293 311 17 0 0 26 5 23 ,., 18 0 0 27 1' 150~· 19 0>'< 28 885 938 20 0 0 29 2,078 2,203 21 0 0 30 3,466 3,674 r~ 22 o··-" 23 O>'c Hay 1 823 872 I 24 0 0 2 1,175 1,246 25 0 0 3 1,324>'< r 26 0>'<" 4 1,550>'< l > 27 0 0 5 1,776•'• 28 O•'<" 6 1,748 1,853 29 0>'< 7 2,101 2,227 30 O>'c 8 1,258 1,333 31 O>'c 9 1,096 1,162 10 956 1• April 1 7>'< 11 740>'< 2 19 20 12 351 372 3 175 186 13 648 687 4 158>'< 14 617 654 5 203 1• 15 329 349 6 209>'< 16 299 317 7 225 1• 17 213>'< 8 249 264 18 182>'< 9 304 322 19 152>'< 10 334>'< 20 121 >'c 11 393 417 21 56 59 12 345>'< 22 27 29 13 339>'< 23 26 28 14 268 284 15 299 317 Total 37,586 16 1,532 1,624 17 986 1,045 18 411 436 19 748>'< 20 562>'< ·'- Interpolated data. APPENDIX S (cont. ) LOilliR PARADISE OIA.c"JNEL Date Catch Estimated Higration Trap 1 Trap 2 Total (catch x l. 045) March 8 0>1: 9 42* 10 118* 11 268* 12 208 213 421 440 13 393 238 631 659 14 178 267 445 465 15 644* 16 777* 17 352 419 771 806 18 436 5 79 1, 015 1 '061 19 1,068* 20 558 623 1,181 1,234 21 691· 426 1,120 1,170 22 1,423* 23 1,801* 24 1, 071 714 1,785 1,865 25 1,237 817 2,054 2,146 26 1' 713 27 672 408 1, 080 1,129 28 2,185* 29 2' 342>'~ 30 2,747* 31 2,934* April 1 3, 384>1: 2 2' 715 838 3,553 3,713 3 2,460 895 3,355 3,506 4 4,148* 5 4,293* 6 4,555* 7 4,691* 8 5,258* 9 3,742 1,257 4,999 5,224 10 3,423 2,184 5,607 5,859 11 2,328 1' 004 3.332 3,482 12 4,860 2,029 6.889 7,145 14 3,524 2,030 5,554 5,804 15 12,236>1: 6,502 18, 738 19,581 16 5' 175 2,662 7,819 8,171. 17 6' 121 3,338 9,459 9,885 18 6,828 3,809 10,637 11,116 19 9,346* 20 9' 459~< APPENDIX S (cont.) Lower Paradise Channel Date Catch Estimated Migration (catch x 1. 045) Trap 1 Trap 2 Total April 21 4,439 2,297 6,736 7,039 22 7,326 3,595 10,921 11,412 23 7,204 4,051 11,255 11, 761 24 4,253 2,143 6,396 6,684 25 1,989 1,443 3,432 3,586 26 5,032* 27 5,706* 28 1,600 3,018 4,618 4,826 29 3,956 4,374 8,330 8,705 30 3,985 3,591 7,576 7,917 I May 1 1,788 2,825 4,613 4,821 l 2 9,652 6,6167 15,819 16,531 3 11' 605* 4 9,866* 5 11,547* 6 8,638 4,244 12,882 13,462 l 7 2,603 1,847 4,450 4,650 8 1, 223 1,005 2,228 2,328 9 2,539 2,439 4,978 5,202 . r· 10 2,630* 11 2,731* l . 12 1,907* 13 885* 14 200 145 345 361 15 182 188 370 387 16 89 61 150 157 * Interpolated data. APPENDIX S (cont.) \.JORTH CREEK Date Catch Estimated Date Catch Estimated Migration Migration (Catch x 1 . 16) (Catch x 1. 16) March 11 14 16 April 21 763 885 12 42 42 22 1,078 1,250 13 58 67 23 1,578 1,830 14 74 86 24 1,619 1,878 15 80>'< 25 1,400 1,624 16 1 OJ ;'r 26 2' 934~< 17 75 87 27 3' 502''' 18 118 137 28 4, 916·:, 19 152>'< 29 5,947•'< 20 127 147 30 4,568 5,299 21 205 238 May 1 9,413 10,919 22 153>'< 2 11,661 13,527 23 137>'< 3 12 '091-.'< 24 65 75 4 12,623•'< 25 83 96 5 13,527 26 63>'< 6 10,195 11,826 27 38 44 7 12,260 14,222 28 27 31 8 8,948 10,380 29 3 5>'< 9 12,138 14,080 30 43>'< 10 11,221>'< 31 24 28 11 12,797•'• April 1 60 70 12 7,933 9,202 2 51 o'r 13 13,026 15,110 3 37 43 14 12,204 14,157 4 53 43 15 9,571 11,102 5 68>'< 16 10,096 11,711 6 7 3 ,., 17 10,957* 7 86 100 18 11,793~- 8 49 57 19 8,670 10,057 9 76 88 20 11' 732 13' 609 10 55 64 21 9,765 11,327 11 71 82 22 8,189 9,499 12 58>'< 23 7,104 8,241 13 73~' 24 7' 904>'< 14 23 27 25 6' 396~' 15 96 111 26 5,149 5,973 16 224 260 27 4,289 4,975 17 148 172 28 2,287 2,653 18 261 303 29 3,432 3,981 19 454>'< 30 2,959 3,432 20 813''' 31 3,434>'< , APPENDIX S (cont.) Worth Creek Date Catch June 1 2 2,488 3 3,684 4 2,944 5 3,769 6 7 8 9 952 10 704 11 12 13 445 14 15 16 17 Total * Interpolated data. Estimated Migration (catch x 1. 16) 3,531* 2,886 4,273 3,415 4,272 2,964* 2,427* 2,097* 1,104 817 812* 715* 516 282* 153* 26* 0* 377' 739 [ I f' l APPENDIX S (cont.) RAILROAD CREEK Date Catch Estimated Estimated Migration Standing Population (catch xl.l6) a Above Trap Har. 22 230 26 7 23 474 550 24 L102 466 25 624 724 26 1,097* 27 1,266 1,469 28 832 965 29 1,319* 30 1, 526:J: 31 1,225 1,421 April 1 2,373 2' 753 2 2,115* 3 1, 273 1 '4 77 4 997 1' 15 7 5 2,845* 6 2,397* 7 3, 770 4, 373 8 2,502 2,902 9 2,429* 10 1,746 1,956 11 802 930 12 1, 776* 13 1,190* 14 1,817 2,108 15 684 793 16 3,596 4,171 17 1,325 1,537 18 1,690 1,960 19 1,604 1' 861 20 2,602 3,018 21 6,547 7,595 22 3,049 3,537 23 1' 051 1, 219 24 326 378 25 910 1,056 26 550* 27 550* 28 38 44 29 1,100* 30 l' 859 2,156 APPENDIX S (cont.) Railroad Creek Date May 1 2 3 4 5 6 13 22 Catch 101 88 * Interpolated data. Estimated Migration (catch x 1. 16) 117 102 100* 100* 100* a 95% confidence limits shown in brackets. Estimated Standing Population Above Trapa 141,100 (126' 600 - 159,500) 19,943 (15' 400 - 26,800) 2,500 (2,200 - 2,800) r l r l r : l i i_ APPENDIX s (cont.) HOPEDALE SLOUGH POND 1 Date Catch Estimated Date Catch Estimated Migration Migration (catch x l . 12) (catch x 1.12) April 1 0 0 May 7 329 368 2 Q;'c 8 235 263 3 0 0 9 112 125 4 0 0 10 138;': 5 0;': 11 50;': 6 Q;'c 12 21 24 7 1 1 13 1 1 8 0 0 14 2 2 9 11 ;'c 15 25 28 10 20 22 16 59 66 11 19 21 17 3 9;': 12 3]-:< 18 50;': 13 56;': 19 21 24 14 59 66 20 54 60 15 71 80 21 133 149 16 148 166 22 126 141 17 48 54 23 112 125 18 90 101 24 118;': 19 63;': 25 114;': 20 12 2;': 26 76 85 21 30 34 27 118 132 22 208 233 28 228 255 23 59 66 29 103 115 24 51 57 30 136 152 25 30 34 31 161-1< 26 27 30 27 21 ;'c June 1 207;': 28 1 1 2 194 217 29 8-lc 3 226 253 30 14 16 4 172;': 5 15 7>': May 1 6 7 6 125>'< 2 20 22 7 109>'< 3 53-1: 8 58;': 4 122;': 9 41 46 5 116 130 10 18 20 6 190 213 Total 5,996 * Interpolated data. ,~ I APPENDIX T CHUM FRY MIGRATION TIMING AT STUDY SITES, EXPRESSED AS l DAILY AND CUMULATIVE PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL MIGRATION. SQUAMISH AREA SITES l Judd Slough (total) Judd Pond 2 Lower Paradise Date Daily Cumulative Daily Cumulative Daily Cumulative (1980) % % % % % % March 8 9 10 0.1 11 0.1 0.2 12 0.1 0.3 13 0.2 0.5 14 0.1 0.6 15 0.2 0.8 16 0.2 1.0 I , 17 0.2 1.2 l . 18 0.3 1.5 19 0.3 1.8 I • 20 0.4 2.2 I 21 0.4 2.6 22 0.4 3.0 23 0.6 3.6 [ 24 0.6 4.2 25 0.7 4.9 26 0.5 5.4 r~ 27 0.3 5.7 L : 28 0.8 6.5 29 0.1 0.1 0.8 7.3 30 0.1 0.2 0.9 8.2 31 0.1 0.3 1.0 9.2 April 1 0.4 0.7 1.0 10.2 2 0.1 0.8 0.1 0.1 1.1 11.3 3 1.0 1.8 0.5 0.6 1.1 12.4 4 0.6 2.4 o. 4 . 1.0 1.2 13.6 5 0.8 3.2 0.5 1.5 1.2 14.8 6 0.9 4.1 0.6 2.1 1.3 16.1 7 1.4 5.5 0.6 2.7 1.4 17.5 8 0.7 6.2 0.7 3.4 1.5 19.0 9 2.5 8. 7 0.9 4.3 1.6 20.6 10 3.2 11.9 0.9 5.2 1.8 22.4 11 3.7 15.6 1.1 6.3 1.1 23.5 12 2.6 18.2 0.9 7.2 2.2 25.7 13 1.9 20.1 0.9 8.1 2.2 27.9 14 0.9 21.0 0.8 8.9 1.8 29.7 15 1.0 22.0 0.8 9.7 5.9 35.6 16 2.9 24.9 4.3 14.0 2.5 38.1 APPENDIX T (cont.) Judd Slough (total) Judd Pond 2 Lower Paradise Date Daily Cumulative Daily Cumulative Daily Cumulative (1980) % % % % % % April 17 2.5 27.4 2.8 16.8 3.0 41.1 18 3.1 30.5 1.2 18.0 3.4 44.5 19 4.0 34.5 2.0 20.0 2.8 47.3 20 4.2 38.7 1.5 21.5 2.9 50.2 21 6.4 45.1 2.0 23.5 2.1 52.3 22 2.9 48.0 1.3 24.7 3.5 55.8 23 3.6 51.6 2.5 27.2 3.6 59.4 24 3.7 55.3 0.9 28.1 2.0 61.4 25 4.5 59.8 0.8 28.9 1.1 62.5 26 4.0 63.8 1.4 30.3 1.5 64.0 27 4.4 68.2 3.1 33.4 1.7 65.7 28 3.7 71.9 2.5 35.9 1.5 67.2 29 5.0 76.9 5.9 41.7 2.6 69.8 30 2.7 79.6 9.8 51.5 2.4 72.2 May 1 2.2 81.8 2.3 53.8 1.5 73.7 i 2 2.9 84.7 3.3 57.1 5.0 78.7 i 3 2.8 87.5 3.5 60.6 3.5 82.2 4 2.3 89.8 4.1 64.7 3.0 85.2 ~~ 5 2.3 92.1 4.7 69.4 3.5 88.7 j 6 3.2 95.3 4.9 74.3 4.1 92.8 ~· 7 0.9 96.2 5.9 80.2 1.4 94.2 -<) 8 0.9 97.1 3.6 83.8 0.7 94.9 i 9 0.8 97.9 3.1 86.9 1.6 96.5 ! -< 10 0.6 98.5 2.6 89.5 1.3 97.8 11 0.4 98.9 2.0 91.5 0.9 98.7 -.J1 12 0.3 99.2 1.0 92.5 0.6 99.3 f ~ 13 0.2 99.4 1.8 94.3 0.4 '· 99.7 -'. 14 0.1 99.5 1.7 96.0 0.2 99.9 1 15 0.1 99.6 0.9 96.9 0.1 100.0 ! 16 0.2 99.8 0.8 97.7 -! 17 0.1 99.9 0.6 98.3 -'. 18 0.1 100.0 0.5 98.8 19 0.1 100.1 0.4 99.2 20-0.1 100.2 0.3 99.5 21 0.2 99.7 22 0.1 99.8 23 0.1 99.9 APPENDIX T (cont.) Worth Creek Hopedale Slough Pond 1 Date Daily Cumulative Daily Cumulative (1980) % % % % April 23 0.5 2.6 1.1 18.6 "24 0.5 3.1 0.9 19.5 25 0.4 3.5 0.6 20.1 26 0.8 4.3 0.5 20.6 27 0.9 5.2 0.3 20.9 28 1.3 6.5 29 1.6 8.1 0.1 21.0 30 1.4 9.5 0.3 21.3 May 1 2.9 12.4 0.1 21.4 2 3.6 16.0 0.4 21.8 3 3.2 19.2 0.9 22.7 4 2.3 22.5 2.0 24.7 5 3.5 26.0 2.1 26.8 6 3.1 29.1 3.5 30.3 7 3.8 32.9 6.0 36.3 8 2.7 35.6 4.3 40.6 ~ I 9 3.7 39.3 2.0 42.6 10 3.0 42.3 2.3 44.9 , I 11 3.4 45.7 0.8 45.7 12 2.4 48.1 0.4 46.1 ~ I 13 4.0 52.1 14 3.7 55.8 ~ I 15 2.9 58.7 0.5 46.6 16 3.1 61.8 1.1 47.7 17 2.9 64.7 0.6 48.3 I 18 3.1 67.8 0.8 49.1 19 2.7 70.5 0.4 49.5 20 3.6 74.1 1.0 50.5 ~ I 21 3.0 77.1 2.4 52.9 22 2.5 79.6 2.3 55.2 J 23 2.2 81.8 2.0 57.2 24 2.1 83.9 1.9 59.1 ~ 25 1.7 85.6 1.9 61.0 J 26 1.6 87.2 1.4 62.4 27 1.3 88.5 2.2 64.6 -., 28 0.7 89.2 4.2 68.8 ] 29 1.1 90.3 1.9 70.7 30 0.9 91.2 2.5 73.2 31 0.9 92.1 2.6 75.8 . i J June 1 0.9 93.0 3.4 79.2 2 0.8 93.8. 3.5 82.7 3 1.1 94.9 4.1 86.8 .J 4 0.9 95.8 3.3 90.1 5 1.2 97.0 2.9 93~. 0 6 0.8 97.8 2.4 95.4 7 0.6 98.4 2.0 97.4 .. APPENDIX T (cont.) Worth Creek Hopedale Slough Pond 1 ,, Date Daily Cumulative Daily Cumulative ( (1980) % % % % ,j: ~ ~ June 8 0.6 99.0 1.6 99.0 9 0.3 99.3 0.8 99.8 10 0.2 99.5 0.3 100.1 11 0.2 99.7 I . ; 12 0.2 99.9 13 0.1 100.0 14 0.1 100.1 r : I > l ) APPENDIX U COHO SALNON FRY MIG~~TION DATA FROM ALL STUDY SITES IN 1980. SQU~~ISH AREA SITES Date Judd Slough (total) Judd Slough Pond 2 Lower Paradise Channel Daily E"A-pansion Estimated Daily Expansion Esti"mated Daily Expansion Estimated Catch Factor Higration Catch Factor Migr'ation Catch Factor Migration 'March 21 0 11.11 0 1.06 1.045 22 0* (all (all 23 4* dates) dates) 24 2 1. 67 3 25 5 1. 67 8 0 0 0 0 26 4* 0* 3* 27 0 11.11 0 1 1 10 10 28 7* 0* 14* 29 8* 0* 29* 30 8* 0* 37* 31 9* 0* 41* April 1 9* 0* 59* 2 8 1. 6 7 13 0 0 51 53 3 37 11.11 411 3 3 110 115 4 337* 0* 134* 5 395* 0* 161* 6 453* 0* 177* 7 511* 0* 488* 8 409 l. 6 7 683 0 0 225 235 9 1,954* 2 2 1, 006 1,051 10 225 11.11 2,500 0 0 151 158 11 241 11.11 2,678 4 4 115 120 12 1,876* 6>~ 513 536 13 1' 195* 19>~ 434 454 14 144 3.13 451 13 14 255 266 15 146 3.13 457 28 30 376 393 16 243 11. 11 2' 700 14 15 188 196 17 1,500* 11 12 168 176 18 429 3.13 1' 343 23 24 420 439 ' _ ___~ ..._. _ ___, APPENDIX U (cont.) Date Judd Slough (total) Judd Slough Pond 2 Lower Paradise Channel Daily Expansion Estimated Daily Expansion Estimated Daily Expansion Estimated Catch Factor Migration Catch Factor Migration Catch Factor Migration April 19 1, 2 77* 12* 233* 20 952* 10* 243* 21 316 3.13 989 1 1 81 85 22 167 3.13 523 6 6 188 196 23 15 7 3.13 491 7 7 420 439 24 372* 0 0 271 283 25 33 3.13 103 19 20 74 77 26 179* 34* 168* 27 168* 59* 150* 28 20 3.13 63 78 83 137 143 29 108 3.13 338 69 73 221 231 30 84 3.13 263 282 299 135 141 May 1 55 3.13 172 100 106 27 28 2 30 3.13 94 79 84 32 33 3 117* 68* 58* 4 94* 60* 73* 5 68* 12 13 87* 6 27 3.13 85 77 82 109 114 7 8 3.13 25 69 73 110 115 8 8 3.13 25 26 28 30 31 9 3 3.13 9 48 51 122 127 10 12* 32* 55* 11 5* 37* 53* 12 1 3.13 3 16 17 6 6 13 2 1. 67 3 40 42 24 25 14 1 1. 67 2 26 28 5 5 15 0 1. 67 0 21 22 15 16 16 2 1. 67 3 11 12 6 6 17 0 13* 8* 18 0 11* 7* 19 0 9* 6* 20 0 7* 5* APPENDIX U (cont.) Date Hay 21 22 23 Totals Judd Slough (total) Daily Expansion Estimated Catch Factor Migration 0 1. 6 7 2,911 0 0 25,952 * Interpolated data. Judd Slough Pond 2 Daily Expansion Estimated Catch Factor Migration 3 1 9 1,097 3 1 10 1,543 Lmver Paradise Channel Daily Expansion Estimated Catch Factor Migration 6,035 4* 4* 3* 8,600 APPENDIX U (cont.) FRASER VALLEY SITES Date Worth Creek Railroad Creek Hopedale Slough Pond 1 Daily Expansion Estimated Daily Daily Expansion Estimated Catch Factor Migration Catch Catch Factor Migration March 8 0* 1. 16 0 1.12 9 5* (all 6 (all 10 13* dates) 15 dates) 11 31 36 12 31 36 13 38 44 14 73 85 15 53* 61 16 75* 87 17 49 57 18 102 118 19 49* 57 20 14 16 21 29 34 22 16* 19 7 23 13* 15 24 6 7 25 4 5 26 4* 5 27 4 5 28 0 0 29 4* 5 30 9* 10 31 9 10 2 2 April 1 17 20 0 0 2 11* 13 3* 3 1 4 5 6 7 APPENDIX U (cont.) Date \.Jorth Creek Railroad Creek Hopedale Slough Pond 1 Daily Expansion Estimated Daily Daily Expansion Estimated Catch Factor Migration Catch Catch Factor M-igration April 4 15 17 2 4 4 5 23* 27 4* 4 6 37* 43 2* 2 7 so 58 5 1 1 8 45 52 21 1 1 9 96 111 25 1* 1 10 99 115 31 2 2 11 61 71 28 1 1 12 74* 86 3* 3 13 88* 102 6* 7 14 63 73 14 6 7 15 141 164 23 10 11 16 85 99 3 4 4 17 51 59 4 3 3 18 143 166 1 0 0 19 97* 113 2 1* 1 20 123* 143 6 0* 0 21 98 114 3 0 0 22 127 147 0 0 23 98 114 2 3 3 24 74 86 0 0 25 81 94 4 0 0 26 111* 129 0 0 27 149* 173 0* 0 28 194* 225 0 0 29 256* 297 0* 0 30 178 206 2 0 ·0 May 1 509 590 2 0 0 2 421 488 1 0 0 ' ' n II' '"1 fill APPENDIX U (cont.) Date Worth Creek Railroad Creek Hopedale Slough Pond 1 Daily Expansion Estimated Daily Daily Expansion Estimated Catch Factor Migration Catch Catch Factor Migration Hay 3 1' 36 7* 1,586 0* 0 4 1' 485* 1' 723 1* 1 5 1,810* 2,100 1 1 6 3, 172 3,680 2 2 7 1,837 2' 131 3 3 8 572 664 4 4 9 1, 401 1,625 0 0 10 851* 987 1* 1 11 843* 978 0* 0 12 580 673 0 0 13 547 635 0 0 14 491 570 1 1 15 633 734 1 1 16 954 1,107 7 8 17 636* 738 3* 3 18 671* 778 2* 2 19 322 374 0 0 20 737 855 0 0 21 389 451 0 0 22 158 183 0 0 23 180 209 0 0 24 117* 136 1* 1 25 78* 90 1* 1 26 13 15 2 2 27 41 48 2 2 28 16 19 0 0 29 26 30 0 0 30 28 32 1 1 31 36* 42 1* 1 APPENDIX U (cont.) Date Harth Creek Railroad Creek Hopedale Slough Pond 1 Daily Expansion Estimated Daily Daily Expansion Estiamted Catch Factor Migration Catch Catch Factor Migration June 1 88* 102 1* 1 2 53 61 2 2 3 184 213 5 6 4 32 37 0 0 5 92 107 0 0 6 53* 61 0* 0 7 48* 56 0 0 8 54* 63 0* 0 9 36 42 0 0 10 33 38 0 0 11 41* 48 12 43* so 13 54 63 14 12'>', 14 15 12* 14 16 0* 0 Totals 25,076 29,088 186 107 120 * Interpolated data r .. ,., '., :....___j APPENDIX V SUMMARY OF CHUM SALMON TAGGING AND RECOVERY DATA FOR BILLY HARRIS SLOUGH. Tagging Date Nov. 14, 1979 Nov. 26, 1979 Nov. 29, 1979 Subtotals Dec. 12, 1979 Season Totals No. of Tags Available for Recovery Male Female Total 100 74 174 100 51 151 66 33 99 266 158 424 129 67 196 395 225 620 No. of Tags Recovered % of Tags Recovered Male Female Total Male Female Total 73 69 78 51 38 32 189 152 25 38 214 190 142 73.0 93.2 129 78.0 100.0 7p 57.6 97.0 341 ave.69.5 96.7 63 19.4 56.7 404 season57.0 86.7 ave. 81.6 85.4 70.7 79.2 32.1 67.5 Recovery Period No. of Carcasses Examined Population Estimates and 95% Confidence Intervals Oct.30-Dec.11,1979 Dec.12-1979,- Jan. 17, 1980 Total Male Female Total 1121 1038 2159 505 799 1304 1626 1837 3463 Male ~ower Point Upper Limit Limit 1355 1577 1799 1639 2530 3724 2994 4107 5523 Female Lower Point Upper Limit Limit 910 1080 1250 983 1395 1917 1893 2475 3167 Total Lower Point Upper Limit Limit 2265 2657 3049 2622 3925 5641 4887 6582 8690 I I I_ I I APPENDIX W METHODOLOGY FOR ESTIMATING CHUM SALMON FRY EMIGRATION FROM BILLY HARRIS SLOUGH. Chum Fry Catch Data Date Catch Date Catch --- March 15 7,364 April 1 10,040 16 3,848 2 14,456 17 16,467 3 13,922 18 10,235 4 27,151 19 14,987 5 24,152 20 13,443 6 57,313a 21 6' 142 7 90' 473 22 8,926 8 24,869 23 13,482 9 40,922 24 12,825 10 48,098 25 18,103 11 35,951 26 18,076 12 30,170 27 19,463 13 36,349 28 17,045 14 78,226 29 21,003a 15 54,186 30 24,961 16 60,523 31 20,522 17 57' 340 18 35,360 Total 986,393 a Interpolated Termination of Trapping On April 19 the rising level of the Harrison River flooded out-the fry trap at Billy Harris Slough, at a time when significant chum fry migration was still underway. Gear Efficiency As no marked fish releases were made at this site to test gear efficiency, it was assumed that traps were 100% efficient in capturing fry. It should be noted that the trap arrangement was similar to that used at other Fraser Valley study sites. Estimating the Total Migration The approach to estimating the total migration from data covering only a portion of that migration was based on the observation that: (i) between the 10% and 90% points on the curve of cumulative migration the number of migrants increases at a reasonably constant or linear rate (see following graph); and (ii) the period between 10% and 90% of the migration averages z 0 1-<t 0:: APPENDIX W (cont.) 80 +---10% AND 90% OF MIGRATION LOWER PARADISE --,. ~ 'I '-'" u ,_, ~ L.r ~ 60 ~ I I 1.0 lJ... 0 20 BILLY HARRIS 20 30 MARCH _,?",? _,-" X I I X / X I '1C-x-X / xl+-- 1 10 X I X I I X~ JUDD j SLOUGH I X I 20 APRIL 30 10 WORTH CREEK 20 MAY 30 10 JUNE .8 >- 0:: r lJ... <.? lJ... ::> 0 0 ...J .6 0 C/) z C/) w 0:: > 0:: .4 I-<t <t r ...J ~ ::> ~ ...J .2 ~ ro Churn salmon fry seasonal migration patterns at four study sites as shown by curves of cumulative migration. The Billy Harris Slough migration is plotted as cumulative numbers; the migration at other sites is plotted as cumulative percent. -.. APPENDIX W (cont.) 30 days, based on data from groundwater-fed spawning areas near Billy Harris Slough such as Worth Creek (present study) and Barnes and Inches creeks (Fedorenko and Bailey, 1980). Three years of data were available from Barnes and Inches creeks. Estimating the total migration from partial data required the following steps: -plotting the cumulative daily catch of chum fry on graph paper; identifying the 10% point of migration (the point where migration increases at a linear rate), judged to be April 2 in the case of the Billy Harris Slough data: determining the average daily rate of migration over the first 12 days following the 10% migration point (ie. the period April 3 -14) and multiplying by 30 to obtain the total migration between the 10% and 90% points; and multiplying the estimate for the peak 80% of migration by 100/80 to estimate total migration. Accuracy of the Method The accuracy of the method was tested using chum fry migration data from the present study and published reports which presented estimates of both daily and total chum migrations over the season. The following table compare5migration estimates derived from partial data (ie. 12 days of peak migration) with the actual migration estimated from a total season of trapping. Except for the 1974 Big Qualicum migration estimate, the estimates from partial data agree reasonably well with the estimates from tr?pping throughout the season. It should be noted that during the 1970's the Big Qualicum chum fry migration period may have been more contracted than under natural conditions, due to selection of particular run segments for Spawning Channel No. 2 and the fact that a major portion of the total fry output came from that channel. This would increase the likelihood that duration of peak migration would be unusually short, eg. 21 days in 1974. Under these circumstances the method outlined above (which assumes a 30 day peak migration period) would tend to overestimate the fry migration. APPENDIX W (cont.) Comparison of Chum Fry Migration Estimates (Using Method Applied to Billy Harris Slough Data) with Actual Migrations at Several British Columbia Sites Site Year No. of Days Estimated Actual % Peak Migration Migration Migration Difference Big Qualicum River Little Qualicum River Worth Creek Judd Slough Lower Paradise 1960 1961 1973 1974 1975 1979 1980 1980 1980 28 25 34 21 26 22 30 25 36 Overall Totals 22,271,875 401,075 13,081,963 82,841,203 58,342,188 27,614,069 444,303 659,453 331,741 17,695,000 451,590 13,145,717 52,320,943 64,354,125 31,096,386 377,739 844,228 328,547 205,987,870 180,614,280 b + 25.9b -11.2 c o. 5 d + 58.3 9.3e + 17.6 -21.9 + 1.0 + 14 • 0/o (123,146,670)(128,293,340) (-4.0%)a a1974 Big Qualicum data were omitted from calculations in brackets. b Anon. 1961, 1962 cPaine et al. 1975 d Sandercock & Minaker, 1975 eMinaker et al. 1979 fLister et al. 1979 l ~ r • I APPENDIX X CHUM SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION AT FOUR STUDY SITES DURING DECEMBER 11 -14, 1979. a Judd Slough Lower Paradise Channel Worth Creek Railroad Creek Section Spawners Observed Section Spawners Observed Section Spawners Observed Section Spawners Observed (m ) No. % (m) No. % (m) No. % (m) No. % 0-60 3 0.3 0-15 14 5.2 0-15 42 10.0 0-15 10 3.0 60-120 4 0.4 15-30 22 8. 1 15-30 30 7.2 15-30 57 17.3 120-180 2 0.2 30-45 53 19.6 30-45 52 12.4 30-45 45 13.7 180-240 2 0.2 45-60 17 6.3 45-60 32 7.6 45-60 38 11.6 240-300 16 1.5 60-75 17 6.3 60-75 50 11.9 60-75 54 16.4 300-360 11 1.0 75-90 13 4.8 75-90 35 8.4 75-90 44 13.4 360-420 31 2.9 90-105 3 1.1 90-105 30 7.2 90-105 23 7.0 420-480 78 7.3 105-120 4 1.5 105-120 80 19. 1 105-120 15 4.6 480-540 126 11.8 120-135 16 5.9 120-135 41 9.8 120-135 43 13. 1 540-600 226 21.2 135-150 135-150 27 6.4 600-660 150-165 Total 329 66o-no 110 10.3 165-180 2 0.7 Total 419 720-780 .· 182 17.1 180-195 780-840 132 12.4 195-210 21 7.8 840-900 11 1.0 210-225 6 2.2 900-960 2 0.2 225-240 31 11.5 960-1020 19 1.8 240-255 21 7.8 1020-1080 14 1.3 255-270 21 7.8 1080-1140 3 0.3 270-285 9 3.3 1140-1200 285-300 1200-1260 3 0.3 300-325 1260-1320 4 0.4 1320-1380 34 3.2 Total 270 1380-1470 54 5.1 Total 1067 aSections listed from bottom to top of each channel. ,~ APPENDIX Y LISTING OF CHUM SALMON FRY LENGTH AND WEIGHT [ ' STATISTICS. Date Sample Length (nun) Weight(mg) I Size Mean Range SD Mean Range SD Judd Slough l Apr. ll 39 38.1 36-40 0.9 329 260-390 26 17 42 39.3 37-42 1.1 393 280-420 34 22 42 38.5 36-42 1.4 324 260-470 52 24 42 38.4 35-40 2.1 334 240-440 47 29 42 38.2 35-41 1.3 357 290-400 24 May 1 43 38.2 36-43 2.5 324 270-430 49 6 43 38.7 35-40 1.6 380 320-410 21 8 42 38.4 36-42 1.4 363 310-410 so 13 41 39.0 37-42 1.4 378 350-410 21 Judd Slough Pond 2 Apr. 16 42 38.0 34-40 1.6 315 230-390 49 23 41 38.2 35-40 1.5 325 220-410 48 28 42 38.7 37-41 1.1 320 270-350 28 May 7 42 38.6 36-42 1.5 366 300-420 25 r - 15 42 38.8 35-41 1.3 372 350-400 16 L Lower Paradise Channel Har. 18 39 37.9 35-41 2.0 331 290-410 31 r - 27 40 38.2 37-40 1.0 336 270-350 24 [ Apr. 2 40 37.9 35-41 1.3 315 240-410 34 11 40 37.9 37-40 0.7 329 300-360 14 l. 15 43 38.1 35-41 1.3 308 240-410 36 18 38 38.3 33-41 1.4 309 270-380 57 22 36 38.7 37-42 1.3 347 290-430 43 24 43 38.1 36-41 1.8 319 270-370 33 [ 28 42 38.7 36-41 1.3 344 280-420 40 May 1 45 38.3 31-41 1.8 340 260-450 38 6 41 39.6 36-43 1.7 386 340-420 18 8 39 38.0 35-41 1.5 355 290-420 61 13 41 38.6 36-46 2.2 378 340-470 28 Worth Creek Mar. 28 27 38.6 36-40 1.2 328 270-400 36 Apr. 8 40 38.0 35-43 2.1 336 220-450 53 15 40 36.3 32-45 2.9 325 200-500 69 21 25 37.7 35-48 2.4 348 320-670 75 30 40 37.0 35-39 1.0 340 240-390 48 May 2 40 37.0 34-lfO 1.7 315 210-400 53 6 Lf0 37.9 35-40 1.4 333 220-500 62 13 40 37.6 35-40 1.2 267 150-320 46 15 34 37.8 35-41 1.5 268 170-340 45 20 40 37.7 36-40 1.0 271 150-400 58 22 40 37.7 35-40 1.5 320 210-500 76 27 40 38.0 35-43 1.6 311 200-540 74 29 40 37.9 35-40 1.4 306 210-420 61 June 4 40 38.2 35-42 1.7 323 220-510 69 10 40 37.9 35-43 1.5 304 170-570 75 APPENDIX Y (cont.) Date Sample Length (mrr.) Weight (mg) Size Mean Range SD Mean Range SD Railroad Creek Mar. 28 40 37.5 34-42 2.3 312 230-440 59 Apr. 4 !10 37.9 36-42 1.4 340 250-420 45 14 42 38.7 37-41 2.5 346 270-580 106 15 !40 36. 1 32-40 2.3 226 210-410 49 21 41 40.7 37-41 1.4 !dO 240-720 113 23 40 37.6 36-40 1.0 348 240-430 54 29 40 38. 1 34-42 2. 1 336 230-420 57 May 5 6 38.5 35-47 2.2 375 270-560 92 13 8 40 37.7 35-42 1.8 280 120-420 79 22 8 43 37.7 34-!tJ 1.9 353 240-550 78 1{oJ2edale Slough Pond 1 Apr. 30 14 38.6 35-41 2. 7 413 260-750 14 7 May 6 40 39.0 37-45 2. 1 378 250-540 64 15 22 37.5 35-49 2.8 314 170-800 ll5 15a 20 38.9 35-53 3.7 347 220-1040 173 20 40 37.7 36-40 LO 274 200-400 47 27 40 38.4 36-41 1.2 308 230-460 49 June 4 33 38.8 36-53 2.9 334 200-1200 160 10 10 37.7 37-39 0.7 314 230-360 'J7 .JI a Samples collected by seining.