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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

areas that had noticeable surface turbulence with increased water velocities. Length and width was measured for each habitat unit. The maximum depth and average depth was also determined for each habitat unit. FIGURE 31.—Photos of glide habitat (upper photo) and the convergence pool (lower photo) of Johns Creek, Gene Coulon Park. In the background of the convergence pool photo is Lake Washington. Fish surveys of Johns Creek were conducted during the day primarily by a snorkeler who slowly moved upstream and counted fish. In small- and medium-sized streams, juvenile Chinook salmon appear to be easily observed and counted during the daytime. At night, the snorkeler’s light is usualy close to the fish and often causes fish to scatter, thus making it difficult to count the fish. Pools and most glides were surveyed by snorkelers. In 2003, shallow habitat units (riffles and some glides) that were too 55
shallow to snorkel were surveyed through surface observations by walking slowly along the stream bank. Because fish are often difficult to observe in riffles when using surface observations, we used electrofishing equipment to sample this habitat in 2004. The number of Chinook salmon and other fish were recorded for each habitat unit. At the location of individual or groups of Chinook salmon, we also measured the water column depth (surface to bottom). In 2003, surveys of Johns Creek were done once every 2 weeks from March to June while in 2004, surveys were conducted once every 3 weeks from February to May. Stomach samples of Chinook salmon from Johns Creek were also collected in 2003 to compare their diet to Chinook salmon collected from the lakeshore. Chinook salmon in Johns Creek were collected with a small beach seine. Lakeshore fish were collected at a site in the north end of Gene Coulon Park, approximately 1 km from the mouth of Johns Creek. Stomach samples were taken once a month from the end of February to the end of May. Fish processing, laboratory analysis, and data analyses for stomach samples were done the same as tributary mouth sampling (see Chapter 5). Culvert Creek. —In addition to Johns Creek, we also surveyed a small unnamed creek or seep in Gene Coulon Park (Figure 27). It begins on the east side of the railroad tracks about 100 m from Lake Washington. Except for a section under the railroad tracks, the upper 35 m are daylighted. Sixty-five meters from the lake, the creek runs through a small drain and drops 2.1 m into a culvert. The lower 65 m was available to juvenile Chinook salmon and was located entirely in a culvert (Figure 32), thus we referred to this creek as Culvert Creek. The outlet of the creek is along a riprap bank (Figure 32). The creek has a small sandy delta. The delta has a steep gradient similar to the riprap bank. In the summer and fall, the creek is usually dry. During the winter and spring, base streamflows appear to be approximately 0.04 cfs. Snorkel surveys were conducted along four transects at this location: 1) creek (entirely inside culvert), 2) delta (4 m long by 3 m wide), 3) an adjacent 18-m-long riprap shoreline and, 4) a 14-m-long gravel beach 40 m north of the creek’s mouth. The length of the creek that we were able to snorkel varied with lake level. In February, the lake level was low and the lower end of the culvert was perched above the lake level and the creek was one long riffle. We assumed no Chinook salmon could use the creek during this time period. As the lake rose, water was backed up in the culvert and we were able to snorkel inside the culvert. Transects were surveyed four times, approximately once every three weeks from March to May. 56
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 and 28: FIGURE 8.—Map of south Lake Washi
Page 29 and 30: FIGURE 10—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: CHAPTER 6. USE OF NONNATAL TRIBUTAR
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?