Nearshore Habitat Use by Juvenile Chinook Salmon in Lentic ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

# of marked Chinook 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Yellow Red March 25 April 1 April 9 April 15 Survey dates FIGURE 9.—Number of marked Chinook salmon observed 1, 7, 15, and 21 days after release (March 24), Gene Coulon Park, south Lake Washington, 2003. One hundred and eight yellow-marked fish were released at south part of the park and 102 red-marked fish were released at the north part of park. Marked Chinook salmon that were observed after release did not move appreciably from the release site. All marked Chinook salmon we observed had moved less than 150 m from the release site (Figures 10, 11, and 12). Movement from the release site occurred both towards (south to southeast) and away (north to northeast) from the mouth of the Cedar River. However, slightly more fish appeared to move away from the Cedar River than towards the river (Figure 13). On all dates, the distance moved by fish that moved towards the Cedar River appeared to be similar to those that moved away from the river (Figure 13) except on day 1, when red-marked fish that moved away from the river had moved substantially further than those that had moved towards the river. Unmarked Chinook salmon were observed along the entire shoreline surveyed. The total number of Chinook salmon we observed ranged from 3,424 on March 25 to 1,779 on April 9. Similar to earlier sampling in 2001, their abundance appeared to be related strongly to shoreline armoring (rip rap or bulkhead). In the seven transects that were mostly armored, the number of juvenile Chinook salmon was three times lower than in transects that had little or no armoring (Mann-Whitney U test = 9.0; P = 0.005). Additionally, large numbers of Chinook salmon were present on the boat ramps, as was observed in previous years. 17
FIGURE 10—Map of south Lake Washington displaying the overall shoreline area (dashed lines) where marked Chinook salmon were found for each release group. The perpendicular lines to shore indicate the boundaries of the shoreline area where marked Chinook salmon were found. The bolded line is the shoreline area of Gene Coulon Park surveyed. The release site (open circles) of each group of dye-marked fish is also shown. Marked Juvenile Chinook salmon were released on March 24, 2003, and snorkel surveys were conducted 1, 7, 15, and 21 days after release. 18
Page 1 and 2: U.S. Fish and IU.S. Wildlife FishSe
Page 3 and 4: SUMMARY In 2003 and 2004, we contin
Page 5 and 6: An overhanging vegetation/small woo
Page 7 and 8: Table of Contents Page SUMMARY ....
Page 9 and 10: List of Figures Figure Page FIGURE
Page 11 and 12: FIGURE 37.—Water column depth (m)
Page 13 and 14: The major tributary to Lake Washing
Page 15 and 16: Fry emerge from their redds from Ja
Page 17 and 18: FIGURE 2.—Location of index sites
Page 19 and 20: most dates (Figure 4). Unlike 2002,
Page 21 and 22: Chinook/m 2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 Wes
Page 23 and 24: 0.3 Mercer Island Chinook/m 2 0.2 0
Page 25 and 26: particularly valuable. Shoreline im
Page 27: FIGURE 8.—Map of south Lake Washi
Page 31 and 32: # of marked Chinook 40 30 20 10 0 A
Page 33 and 34: CHAPTER 3. RESTORATION SITES Introd
Page 35 and 36: Beer Sheva Park.—At Beer Sheva Pa
Page 37 and 38: Results Seward Park, 2003.—In 200
Page 39 and 40: 4 3.5 Chinook/100 m 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0
Page 41 and 42: Martha Washington Park, 2003.—In
Page 43 and 44: 120 Chinook/100 m 100 80 60 40 20 s
Page 45 and 46: snorkeling and scuba diving were co
Page 47 and 48: Water column depth (m) . 0.80 0.60
Page 49 and 50: CHAPTER 5. FEEDING AT TRIBUTARY MOU
Page 51 and 52: FIGURE 28.—Location of four south
Page 53 and 54: FIGURE 29.—Photos of sites used t
Page 55 and 56: sampling. At night, Chinook salmon
Page 57 and 58: TABLE 5.—Diet overlap indices (C)
Page 59 and 60: TABLE 7.—Diet overlap indices (C)
Page 61 and 62: TABLE 10.—Diet composition of juv
Page 63 and 64: The lack of a large difference betw
Page 65 and 66: CHAPTER 6. USE OF NONNATAL TRIBUTAR
Page 67 and 68: shallow to snorkel were surveyed th
Page 69 and 70: Number of Chinook ff 700 600 500 40
Page 71 and 72: column depth used by Chinook salmon
Page 73 and 74: Chinook / m . 5 4 3 2 1 2003 - upst
Page 75 and 76: TABLE 13.—Diet overlap index (C)
Page 77 and 78: (P. Castle, WDFW, unpublished data)
Page 79 and 80:
FIGURE 41.—Placement of Scotch br
Page 81 and 82:
FIGURE 43.—Photo of a group of ju
Page 83 and 84:
CHAPTER 8. LAKE QUINAULT SURVEYS In
Page 85 and 86:
FIGURE 45.—Photos of large woody
Page 87 and 88:
Similar to April surveys, the nears
Page 89 and 90:
Chinook / 100m . 500 400 300 200 10
Page 91 and 92:
Tabor and Wurtsbaugh (1991) conclud
Page 93 and 94:
FIGURE 48.—Location of south Lake
Page 95 and 96:
FIGURE 49.—Conducting visual obse
Page 97 and 98:
FIGURE 52.—Photo of a group of ju
Page 99 and 100:
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We wish to thank He
Page 101 and 102:
workshop, Shoreline, Washington, No
Page 103 and 104:
Paron, D.G., and E. Nelson. 2001. S
Page 105 and 106:
Werner, E.E., and D.J. Hall. 1988.
show all

Nearshore Habitat Use by Juvenile Chinook Salmon in Lentic ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?