I
.?
'I :' , , '
1*ff'rr"'
qN*7-}rgg!-jtEftfl
.;
(!.f'
'l
t i.''
, , {i q
"w
' 2
.2
V
1
o
PelagLc Fisheries
FLsheries and
and Coastal
CoastaL Rivers
Bivers Investigation
Pelagic
Investi.gation
gecti.on
Progress
Beport
Coaetal Rivers
Rivers Section
Progress Report - Coastal
o
o
a
- June
July
Jurne30, 1967
July l,
1, 1966
1966 196?
a
o
0
Fish Coniinission
Comrission of
Fish
of Oregon
Oregon
Research Division
Research
Division
t
Jr*y L9?O
July
1970
^d.:1%
/S F'$:.t
S
'i:
,s)gr]o<.* R
r
a *-"i$og
&rsq\t
.
o
'
'
Teble of
Contents
of Contents
Table
'
Page no.
Page
no"
O
G E N f f i A I ,INFORMkTION.
I N F 0 R M A T I O N .. . . ..
GENERAL
o
. .
c.
.
c. c. .e .. .c o .o o .!
r. .
o
.
a
P e r s o n n g ] . . r c .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .c .. .. .. c .. .. .. . . c . .
Personnel
f i , e p o r t s pprepared.
repared.
o .o . .. a o o
Reports
c. .
c. .c . . '.. . c. . .a. . .
. .
a
.
o..
o.
r.
.
I
1
2
ground
Spaming
c .
r o o . . . sees
. . c . ease
Bllflr€f$
. c c .a o e. .ass
Spaningground
surveys...
3
3
c . ...
.
.
Snrri
S p r i n g c h icIiiiok
nook.
Chun.
Chum.
aa
a. .
o . ... . ..
o. .
.
'
.
)
.
a . ,..
.
.
.
c.
.
.
r
.
c
.
a
.
.
.
.o
.
.
r
.
.o
.
a
.
.
r
.
.
.
r
a
r
.
.
*
I
t
.
c.
a
.
.
a
) . a .a.
a
.
.
r
.
o .t
.
a
.
r
.
i
.
o
.
ca
c.. .
oa.
.
.
o . ...
.
.
.
c . ..
.
.
.
a
a
.
I
s
.
a
.
r
r
a
.
a
.
3
3
4
6
6
a. a
so
. a
a
6
6
.
a
.
.
a.
a.
e r
. .
.
a.
a.
.
.
a
a
ao
.
o . ... . .a.
a
Inventory
obstnrctlon
Burveygr ar
Inventory
and obstruction
stream
strealn surveys.
ba6s .. . . . . . ....eao
Shad and
and striped
stripedbass
. . c . .
S i u . * p w F i v e r . . . ... . . . . . . . .r .. .. a. .c .. ar
SiuslajRiver.
S
n i t h RRiver.
tver.
Smith
r . .. .r .. .. I. .c .. .. .. . . .r r
,
ao . a
r . ai . . .
. a.aasae
. . o . c
. .. . . a a
a
r.
r ar ra
a
.
. ..
.
.
.!
.
.
. .
a a*.aa 0ea
UmpcuaRiver as
n . a...
. o o .a a. a. . . . . . . . . ..
!$pggg.$iggl"
. o
. .
..
.
. .
. .
C
o o s RRiver
iverr.
Coos
. . .r .r .! .. .o .r . . . . o . a ra .o . a .. . a a. . a . oo . a a. I
Cqqqi}].,e
ltlyg{
Coguille River
.. r. .c .. .o .. .. .. a. a. a. .. ar a. ao a. a. .| . . a. .
take rearing
regrilrA studies.
.. a. ar a. a. a. a. .. . . a. a. ac a. a. .
a
Lake
a. . .a o
studigg.
Domstrean
Downstream. fiiArarlts.
migrants. .. a. e
.a . G . . ,. .. .. ? .. .r .. .. .| .. .
a
o
Adult
rgturns.
Adult
return. .r .
.
.
.
.
|. .. .. r. .. .. r. .. r. ? ..
.
.
I
.
o .. .. .
.
.
coho fingerlings.
fingerlfuigs. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .
Population estimates
Population
estimates of
of coho
F aall
l l cchinook
h i n o o k e cecology.
o l o s i ' . . . . . .c o
.
. . .
.r
o
S
i x e , s R i v e r . .. .. i o . .. . ! r. .. . .
SaxesRiver.
r...
. ...
o
.
.
c.
.
a
I
.
c .r .
o . o .. a
.
a
.
c
o . .a
c. c .o . a
S
glggi&-g@b.
Juvenile growth. o . .. .. . *r .. a. . .. r . . a. a. . . a. a. .
t
frapJoinginloyer-5i'rer....
Trappinginlowerrv.
c . . .c . .. . r. . . r. c. c, . ... .
.
.
.
iJI. the
the ocean
Sampling
surf .. .. .. .. .. .o .. .c o a. a. a. a. . .
SqpB,}j:rg in
oceaq.sur,f
c..
r.
o I c..
t..
Taggi.ngqf iuveni].es " '...
aaaaaacaaaac
ack Creek" Chetco B;Lver , .
Adult
o
t
Physical
and chenuica"l characteristicg
C
of South Coast streams
I o I o..
l l a t c h e r y s i t e g v aevaluation.....
luation..
r....
r..
o..
Hatcherysite
c o h o lliberations.
i b e r a t l o n s ' .. . . .. .o .o .. .o . .. . .o .o . a r . a . . .a.
Surplus
$ u r p l u s coho
.
. . . a. a a a r
M
i s c e l l a n e o u s aactivities.
ctlvities..
'a ra . . a a 'a. . .a a a r. ar o
. .a
Miscellaneous
C6 . a
ca
Herring
fisheries. . . .c ac . . .a a . r ac e . a ar c .r ,
@
...
| .a oo .a .. ca .
o
.a a. o
Umpqua
River smelt
fishery a . o
ffiglt.fishery.
' e
a
a
.
o a
IlqpquaFiJer
r c
Oxbow
O > c b oBurn,
J r B u r nSiuslaw
$, J - u g l q l ,and
r a n 4Smith
S n l t L rive
g * e r s . , . .. . . a
a .c . . a! . a
.
lImArumCITE
D.
LITERATURE
CITED.
ao . a ar .
o
I1
c
3
3
F
a l l c h chinook
lnook.
Fall
a
a
e r
C
0 A S T A JRIVERS
, & I U E RPROGRA)L5.
S P R O C I I R A .I S .. . . .. . . .
COASTAL
.Coho
& b g . ...
a
c. . .a
a
c . .a. . .
e
a
.
a
r . ... . .
a
a
.
| .! ao . .a
a
.
c . .s
a
I
9
9
9
10
l_0
10
10
10
10
12
12
12
L2
L2
12
L3
13
L3
13
r.5
16
18
18
18
18
18
20
20
20
20
n
20
23
23
23
23
26
26
26
26
28
C'
33
33
33
33
21,
:4
36
36
o
I
t
l1
Inist
of Tables
Tables
List of
Table
Table no,
.Bo.
3
I
1
L.
no,
Page
Pa&eno.
PersonnelPersonnel
erles
and
eries and
pelagic Fishof Coastal
Coastal Rivers
Rivers section,
of
section, Pelagic
FishCoastal
Rivers Investigation,
Investigation,
Coastal Rivers
July
July 1,
l,
L966 to Jrure
l966to
June30,
1967....
o o c ....
. . c . o .......
J0, 196?,
r . . . , . .
2
2
o
3
h
4
o
5
c
6
6
7
o
I
8
1956 to Jrrne
1966to
June30,
1967......
. . , . . ........
!O, L96?,
, o . . . , , . r .I
2
llumbers of
of coho
coho salmon
per m.il
safrnon per
Numbers
milee calculated
eaLculated from
fron
spawning
surveys, 19j0-66
spawning ground
ground surveys,
1950-66 .. .. .r c
.
.
. .. .. .r .. ..
4
Ifimbers
of coho
coho salmon
per mile
saLnon per
miJ.ein
in the
the Terimile
Numbers of
Tennuile
Lakes
system
ca'l.culated
frour
ground
Lakes system calculated from spawning
spawning ground
s u r r y ' e y s1955-66
L, 9 5 5 - 6 6.. .
surveys,
o . . .o . . . . . a .
o r.
"....
.
r
5
Nrrmbers of
of fall
faIL chinook
Numbers
chinook salmon
perrojte
saLnon per
calculated
mile calculated
frcm
spaweing
ground
counts, 1952-66.
survey counts,
from spawning ground survey
Lg5Z-66. .c .. .. ..
5
&mbers
of spring
sprjng chinook
chinook per
calcrelated from
Numbers of
per nile
mile calculated
fron
spav'ining
sunrey counts,
spawning ground
ground survey
counts, 1:9|13-66
1953-66 .. . .. .r .. .c ..
"
M:rnbers of
chrrn salmon
rniJ.e calculated
of chum
per mile
safmon per
Numbers
calculated from
frora
ground
spawning
counts, 1953-66
sunrey counts,
Jl953-66 .. .. .. .o r ., .
spawning ground survey
10
10
o
t2
12
13
13
o
14
14
t5
15
o
o
7
.
.. .
e .c o ..
o .r .|
.
o o .. ? ,
.
.
B
Inventory surveys
srrrveys and
and obstruction
obstnrction surveys
Inventory
surveys in
coastal
in coastal
s t r e a n s , July
J u l y l ,1, 1966
L 9 6 6 -- June
streams,
J u n e 30,
J O , 1967.
1 9 6 7 . 0o c 0o . o r .
9
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
juvenile coho
Suunary
of juvenile
broods stocked
coho broods
Summary of
stocked in
coastal
in coastal
lakes and
resovered in
and recovered
lakes
in traps
traps as
as downstream
downstrean migrants,
migrants,
1960-67.
1960-67.
11
11
7
Estimated
age composition
conposltion of
of Tillamook
Bay chum
Tillanook Bay
Estimated age
chum
s&Lnon,
L9It7-66,
salmon, 1947-66,
9
I
Reports submitted
subrnitted by
by Coastal
Coastal Rivers
&ivers staff,
Reports
staff, July
Jul..y 1,
L,
2
.0
r
c
0
o
0
.
o
,
.
c
!
c
..
r
.
e
,
r
.
c
.
o
.
.
|
.
.
c
.
c
juvenile coho
Numbers of
of marked
narked juvenile
eoho released
released from
Numbers
from the
the
trap
IIaIL Lake arrd
jaek
trap at
at Hail
and subsequent
subsequent adult
adult and jack
r e t u r n r s ,1959-63
1 9 5 9 - 6 3brood
b r o o d years
.yeals..
returns,
. o .. .. o .o . .. . .. .
.
.
15
15
.
16
L6
Juvenile
Juvenile coho
echo abundance, standing
standing crop,
crop, and.
and stream
str€am
f,lorr
in six
coastal streams,
six coastal
flow in
streans, 1963-66 .. .. .. .e .! o .. ..
t?
17
$umary
of tag
recovery data
and recovery
Summary of
tag and
data of
chinook carof chinook
carcasses in
in Jack
Jack Creek,
Creek, Chetco
casses
Chetco River,
River, 1966-67.
1966-67. o
. ..
.
.o .
25
25
Minjmun
strean flows
flons and
Minimum stream
rnatLlmrmtemperatures
and maximum
temperatures
r e c o r d e din
i n ccoastal
o a s t a . l gstreams.
t r e a , m s n . o c . e r c . .. . .
recorded
29
29
.
o ..
$umary
of factors
factors considered
consldered in
Summary of
in locating
locating a coho
coho
hatchery on
on five
flve western
hatchery
western Oregon
Oregon lakes,
lakes, oo . .. . .. .. ..
m
30
Ia
l
1
,
((
(conttd)
List
of Tables
?abLes(cont?d)
List of
&
Table
T+ble no.
no.
t
16
16
L?
17
f
o
o
o
o
o
a
t
Page no.
3ggg"
coho liberated
Number
hatchery coho
liberated
lfunfter of
of adult
1966 brood hatchery
adult 1966
intocoastal
streams......
coastal streans
i.t}to
. . r . r o .| .. .. .. . . . . . 0.
31
3t
coastal
Novement
transplanted adult
coho in
in coastal
of transplanted
Movenrent of
adult coho
streams,
s t r e a n s r 1966
l 9 6 6 bbrood.
r o o d . ..
. . . . .c . .. . .o . . .c .I .o . . .o . . c .
32
o
0
I
'J
I
1
Liet of
of Figures
Figures
List
rf
Fi$ure
Figure Jrg,
no.
t
o
I1
Pounds
of shad
shad and,
and striped
Pounds of
striped bass
bass landed
landed fron
from Oregon
Oregon
streans south
of the
south of
streams
the Columbia River,
River, 1933-65
L933-65 .. . . r
lJ.
U
2
2
Location and
and drainage
drainage system
system of
Clearn Edna,
of Clear,
Tealn
Location
&lna, Teal,
Schuttpelzn and
and Hall
llalL lakes .. .. .t .., . .. .. .r .. . . . .
Schuttpelz,
14
14
Growbh of
of juvenile
fall chinook
chinook at
the nnouth
at the
of
Growth
mouth of
Juvenile fall
Sixes
River
estuarXr, 1966.
1966. .. a. .. . . e . .. .o .. a. . .
Sixes River estuary,
1_g
19
3
3
h
4
Average size
size of
of juvenile
chinook captured
eapturd in
faLL chinook
ln
Average
Juverrlle fall
the lower
lor,ser river,
river, estuary,
estuary, arid
and ocean surf
the
surf during
durjng
.......
Jtrne and
Jul,y
June
andearly
early
July1966....
1965 . . . . . r . o . . . .,
o
5
c
Paqe no.
-Page
6
6
.
growbh rate
Instantaneous growth
rate in
in length
fall
]-ength of
of juvenile
Instantaneous
Juvenil-e fall
chjnook tagged
tagged and
and recovered
recovored in
in Sixes
$ixes River
R:iver estuary,
estuarXr,
chinook
L 9 6 6 . . .. . . . . o
1966
. . o.
.
.
! . . ... . . . .I .c . ...
.
. . . .. .
..
.
.
o
o
o
o
0
o
a
I
8
22
22
Lengtb frequency
freqtrency of
of juvenile
faIL chinook
chlnook in
the
Length
in the
Jurrenlle fall
....... a
7
7
?J
2].
Pistol River,
Pistol
River,May
May1967.
196? . . . . . . r c c . S. r . . .
2l+
24
Length frequency
frequency of
of juvenile
falL chinook
chinook in
Length
fu the
the
Juvenile fall
Wjnchuek
River, Mazy-June
May-Jrure 1967. .r .o .. .c .. .. .r .. o . .
Winchuck River,
2h
24
Age arid
and sex
Age
sex coqpositlon
composition of
of fql:t
fall chinook
chlnook in
Jack
in Jack
Creek, Chetco
Chetco River,
Creek,
RILver, 1966-67
l.:966-67,. .. .. .. .. c .. .. .. .. . .
27
27
4
!l.l
PeS.agicFisheries
Flsheriee and
Rivers Investigation
Inveatigation
Pelagic
CoastaL Rivers
ard Coastal
Progreso Reporb
Progress
Report
June 30,
July 1,
1, 1966
1966 -- June
30, 1967
1967
July
t
NERAL INFORMATION
ffi$rgnAl,
II[F0nMA,TIoN
May L966,
1966, Coastal
Rivers activities
have been
been performed
performed under
under
Coaeta.LR;Lvers
Since May
activLties have
a
administration of
Pelagic FiEhertes
Fisheries and
Rivers Investigation
of
of Pelagic
adminlstratj.on
Coasta1.Rivers
hveetigatlon of
and Coastal
the
the Research
ResearchDivision.
Division.
This
the activities
by the
the
Tlrts report
report encompasses
enconpessesthe
activitS.es by
Coastal
Coastal Rivere
Rivers section
the investigation0
of the
section of
{rrvestigation"
o
is located
Investigation
headquarters is
Investigation headquarbers
located in
i-n Astoria.
Astoria.
permanent
Other petmanent
Brooklngs.
and Brookings.
laboratories
laboratorles are located
Charleston, Newport,
Newport, and
located in
in Charleston,
A
A field
field
chlnook in
falJ. chinook
station
is naintained
maintained ln
in Port
Port Orford
Orford to
to uork
wor1 on
the Elk
Elk
on fall
in the
station is
o
and Sixes
and
Sixee rivers.
rivers.
physica.l stream
ground and
strean surveys,
surveyst
Activities included
incLuded spawning
Activitiee
spawningground
and physical
estfuates
sampling of
of shad
and striped
bass commercial
fisheries, populatlon
population estinates
conmerciaL f,isheries,
sanpling
shad and
sbriped bass
o
and fry
fry
reJ-easesof
of adult
adult and
of
evaluating releases
of juvenile
coho in
streams, evaluating
in selected
seLected streams,
Juvenlle coho
coho, studying
investigations on
on the
the eeologr
ecology
and investigations
coho in
Lake environment,
eoho,
envilorrment, arid
ln aa lake
strrdlrlng coho
gtreang.
of
coastal streams.
chiaook in
in south
of fall
feIL chinook
south coastal
o
Several miscellaneous
studies
nisceAlaneous studies
conducted during
during the
the report
report period
period ere
are also
also included.
fuc}:ded'
conducted
Personnel
Personnel
positlonen
vacant positions.
fiJ.L vacant
to fill
Two
staff to
to the
the staff
bioLogists were
were added
added,to
T\ro biologists
o
Delbert Skee
sick vnae
was hired
hired to
to fL]l
fill aa position
position in
in the
the Neqport
Newport Laboratorlr
Laboratory
$keeslck
Delberb
and Roland
transferred to
to the
the Gold
Gold Beach
Beach office
office (l.ater
(later shlfted
shifted
Roland Moritagne
Montagnetransfemed
and
progtrslnc Wendell
stauffer
lrlendell Stauffer
PassageResearch
Researchprogram.
to
the Fish
ftsh Passage
fnrn the
Brpokingg) from
to Brookings)
a
j,n studies
ecology"
chlnook ecology.
fa1l chinook
on fall
studles on
AXdeto
to assist
was hired
BLologlst Aide
aesist in
as aa Biologist
hired as
was
tines of
of
varj,ous tines
personnel were
at various
Other
were employed
enployed at
Other temporary or seasonal
seasonal personnel
phases of
the investigation.
investigation.
year to
of the
the year
to assist
in some
agslst in
sons phases
o
I
4
Table
lists
Table 1 li.sts
L967.
of June
June 30,
personnel of Coastal
the
Coastal Rivers
Rirrers section
as of
sectlon as
the personnel
30, 1967.
t
2
2..
I
o
S
Table 3..
Table
1.
Personnel
of Coastal
coastaL Riverg
Personnel of
Rivers section,
Pelagic !'ieherLes
Fisheries
section, PeJ-agic
and Coastal
Coaetal Rivers
Bivers Investigation,
InvestX.gatlon, July
and
.Iuly 1,
l, 1966
to
1956 to
.lune 30,
June
30, I95T
1967
Date
started
Employee
Date
ended
Permanent
@
o
biologists
Robert Loeffel
Robert
Loeffel
AIan McGie
Alan
McGie
ProJect Leader,
Project
Astoria
Leader, Astoria
Asset. Project
Asset.
ProJect Leader,
Leader,
Charl-eeton
Charleston
Biologist 13,
Biologist
15, Charleston
Charleston
Biologist is,
Brookings
Biologist
15, Brookings
Biologist 13,
Biologist
Nsr,vport
lS, Newport
Biologist 13,
Biologist
1S, Newport
Newport
Ed Currmiings
Ed
C\:mings
Roland Montagne
Roland
July 1,
July
1, 1.956
1966
July I,
July
1, L966
1966
Del Skee
Del
sick
Skeeslck
Dennls Isaac
Dennis
Isaac
o
Str:dent
Student trs.inees
trainees
Pau]-Rei.mers
Paul
Reimers
Grad.
Grad. student,
Port Orford
Orford
student, Port
Port Orford
Port
Sept. 1966
1966
Sept.
Sept. 23,
23, 1966
Charleston
L966 Charleston
Keith Crenshaw
Keith
Orenshaw
Richard Carleson
Richard
Carleson
o
Tempgra$r
Teorary
Donald
Donald Giliham
C,illhan
$ovo 1,
Nov.
L , 1966
L966 Dec.
Dec. 31,
L966 Laborer
Laborer 1,
Newport
3-, Newport
3I, 1966
.Iune 13,
June
13, 1966
1966 Sept. 16, 1966
Ner,vport
1966 E.
0. A.
L" A,/, Newport
E. 0.
Nov.
Bio.
Aide,
Brookings
Bio. Aide, Brookings
L966
Nov. 7,
7t 1966
Dennle
Dennis }erry
Murry
Wendell
WendeIL Stauffer
Stauffer
o
Remarks
personnel
EconomicOpportunity
Opportunity Act
Act personnel
YJ Economic
Reports
Reports Prepared
Prepared
past year
year are
Reports completed
coryleted during
listed in
Table 2.
2.
Reports
the past
in Table
durtng the
are listed
o
Table 2.
TabLe
2.
o
ftrrmrings, T.
Cummings,
T. E.
Eo
February 1967.
February
McGle, A.
HcGie,
Ao H.
M.
February
February 1967.
L967,
a
Reports submitted
by Coastal
Reports
Bivers staff,
Coastal Rivers
staffe
$rbnltted by
July
1, 1966
1966 to
to June
30, 1967
July 1,
June 30,
196?
Shad
bg.ss fisheries
fisherlee in
in southwestern
ShEd and
striped bass
southilestern
and striped
p"
Proc. Rept.
Co@. Oreg.
Bept. 39
Oregon rivers,
L965. Fish Comm.
0r€9. Proc.
Oregon
rivers, 1965.
Jt p.
coho
Natural
Progress report.
Frogress
report.
Natural rearing
rearfu€ of
of 1964-brood
J-964-brood coho
Canp Creek
salmon
Creek Pond.
Pond.
salmon in
ln Camp
Po Eo
Reimers,
E. and
Rei-uoers,P.
and C. E. Bond.
Bond.
gnout of
("p.) ochene
in the
the snout
chinook
L966. Occurrence
Oecurrence of
ochene in
of chinook
of the
the Bidens
1966.
Bideng (sp.)
Prog. Fieh.
Fish. cult.,
Cult., 2S(l-):
2(l): 62.
62.
salmon
shiners. Frog.
sal$on and
redeide-ffirs.and redside
o
--Tffiie
1967.
and
and R.
R. E.
E. Loeffel,
Loeff,el.
in
The length
length of
of residence of
of juvenile
fall chinook
ctrinook salmon
salmon in
Juvenlle fall
Fish
s€lected Columbia
River tributaries.
tributaries.
Ftsh Comm.
Res.
selected
Colunbia River
Com. Oreg.
0reg. Res.
Briefs
Briefs 13(1):
13(t) 2 5-19.
5-Lg.
o
3.
3.
1L
O
r
r
Table
T a b 1 e2.
2 . ((continued)
sonttnud)
Reimers, P.
P" E.
En
1967.
a967. Cessatlon
chinook spawning
ecLipse.
Cessation of
of chinook
lunar eclipse.
spamirrg during
durrlg aa lunar
CorrmoOreg.
0reg. Res.
Res. Briefs
BrLefs 13(1):
Comm.
125.
!25.
U(1):
G,
Skeesick, D.
D. G,
Febnrary 1967.
February
L967.
of
Summary
of peak counts
cor:nts of
Swonaqp of
of salmon
in survey
sunrrey areas
areaE of
seLrcn in
coastal drainages
the
spawning
major
through
the
1966-67
spawning
najor coastal
throu8h
L966--6?
drainages
Proe' Rept.
&ept.
season. Fish.
s€a,oonr
Co@o Oreg.
Fish. Comm.
Oreg" Proc.
o
Staff.
Staff.
0ctober 1969.
October
1969.
Fish.
Fish.
progress report,
July 1,
1,
Coastal R:lvers
Coastal
Rivers Investigation
progress
fnvestigation
f,epott, July
Jr.rne30,
1965
f965 -- June
1966"
JO, 1966.
o
PNMRA}6
COASTATRIVERS
COASTAL
RIWNS PROGRAMS
Spawning
$parniag Ground
Ground Surveys
$unreys
o
coastal watersheds
r*atersheds
flsh counts
in several
Spawning
Spauning fish
counts of
of salmon
nade in
several coastal
are made
salnon are
winter.
each fall
faLL and winter.
provide
Ihe peak
in standard
areas provide
The
peak counts
counts of
of salmon
stardard areas
salnon in
etfish-pet'!-milert
coastrnride "fish-per-mile"
data for
data
for computing
eoryuting an index
of escapement
into coastwide
lndex of
escapement into
a
give trends
compared
The data
data give
when compared
The
trends in
in abundance
ebtmdance when
figures
figures for
each species.
for each
species"
years.
over a period
period of
over
of years.
years ago
ago
20 years
Nost
the surveys
were established
established 20
Most of
of the
surveys were
the coverage.
Gov€rag€r
although some
although
to increase
some new
ne$ surveys
later added
added to
increaEe the
suryeys were later
o
Preeent
Present
miles for
for
cbinookt 37.7
annual survey
for spring
annnaL
sutruey distances
distances are
28,J miles
are 28.5
ni.les for
spring chinook,
3'1.7 miles
rn{16s for
chinook, 9.9
chum, and
for coho.
coho.
fall
fal1 chinook,
rnlles for
for chum,
and 58.3
9.9 miles
58.3 miles
Additional
Additional
passage over
check distribution
to check
distri.bution
surveys
made to
to check passage
surveys were nade
over ladders
ladders and
and to
fl
o
coho hauled
fron hatcheries.
hatcheries"
and
and spawning
spawning activity
of excess
excess adult
harrl-ed from
activLty of
adult coho
through February
eontj:nred through
Febmary 24,
2{,
Surveys started
started on
2O, 1966,
1966, and
and continued
September 20,
on September
1967.
L967,
a
sea.sonr Pelagic
Coastal Rivers
Rlvers
During
PeLagl c Fisheries
Fisheries and
During the
the spawning
and Coastal
spar,mi:rg season,
personnel. made
made 338
personnel
over 307
niLes.
str:rreys over
Jl8 surveys
30? miles.
Coho
Coho
o
ni"l s
peak count
per mile
coho in
The peak
count of
in eight
coastel drainages
fish per
The
of coho
draS:rages was
lsas 30
eight coastal
30 fish
(Tabte 3).
arid three
three less
less than
than the
the 16-year
16-year average
average (Table
and
3).
count of
The
The jack
three
of three
Jack count
o
.
4.
4.
t1
la{l
fistr per
in 1966
one fish
fieh below
fish
per roiJ.e
mile in
1966 uas
was one
below average.
Brr€rd,g€r Counts
Counts on
on the
the Nehalein,
!{ehalem,
Wilson, Coos,
Coos, and
and Coquille
rivers were
beJ.or average
Co+tjJ.}e rivers
were below
ufilJ.e the
the Nestucca,
Wilson,
average while
Nestucca,
o
Yaquina, and
Alsea rivers
rivens and
ard Alsea
Beaver Creek
Gbeek'were
and Beaver
Yaquina,
were above
above average.
average.
The
Coos
The Coos
$nrreys had
per mile
rrile
surveys
had the
the nost
most pronorurced
pronounced deerease
decrease l,:ith
with ea count
count of
of 19
19 fLsh
f1h per
conpared
coho per
compared to
to the
the L95O-65
1950-65 avsrage
average of
of b6
46 coho
per miJ.e.
mile.
I
fl
Table
Table 3.
J.
nt'le calculated
NunberE of
per mile
of coho
coho salmon
calsulated from
fron
sa]rnon per
Numbers
spawrrirrg
spawning gror.md
ground surveys,
1950-66
sunreys, L9W66
o
o
o
o
1
a
Nehalen
Nehalem
WiJ-son
Wilson
Nestucca
Nestucca
Yaqrina
Yaquina
Alsea
Alsea
Beaver
Coos
Coos
Coqrri].].e
Coi11e
IL"5
11.5
4.0
5"1+
5.4
8.1+
.4
8"5
.5
2"3
2.3
3"3
3,3
LL"0
11.0
Total
Total n'll
miles
es
5l+.1+
54.4
Average number/mile
Average
nunber/niJ-e
6
6
26
26
25
25
26
26
27
27
32
32
33
33
l+6
46
lrg
48
I+
4
33
33
2l+
24
2
2
23
23
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
2h
24
2[
24
29
29
29
29
3h
34
lr2
42
29
29
h
4
12
12
16
16
L2
12
27
27
l+3
43
39
39
35
35
16
16
2l+
24
27
27
2
2
o
0
4
4
I
1
5
6
18
L2
12
31
3L
t&
44
45
45
3
3
3
3
3E
38
3
3
19
19
27
27
3
3
30
30
peak count
cor:nt of
of 114
6? jacks
the Tenmile
Lakes system
114adults
adults arid
and 67
The
Terurile Lakes
system had
had aa peak
iacks
(raute 4).
per
The count
count was
was 47
the 1966-67
1956-6? spawning
per mite
mile durjng
during the
season (Table
spawnjng season
4?
4). The
'A11
adults
eystems in
adults and 5O
50 jacks
jacks below
below the
the ll-year
11-year averager
average. All stream
in both
both
strean systems
jn the
North
and South
?enmille Lake
however, North
North Tenznile
Teruelle
North and
Lake shared in
South Teninile
the decrease;
decrease; however,
(ZY} than
(4$).
Lake had
had aa smaller
than South
fa*e (41%).
Lake
snall-er decrease
d.eerease(25%)
SouthTenmnile
Tennile Lake
The
The
estl-nated
escapenent of
of adults
of 1,000
11000 over
over 1965,
L965"
estimated escapement
was 13,500,
adults was
l3r500r an
increase of
on increase
a
The
of
egg deposition
based on the
the sex
r"atio of
sex ratio
The potential
potential egg
deposition tas
was 23.1
million based
23.1 urill-ion
per female.
dead adults
fecundity of
adults and
fenale.
dead
and aa fecundity
of 3,000
eggs per
31000 eggs
F+1} pEhook
Fall
chinook
o
I
.o
coasta"l rivers
In
in six
ri.vers
fal]- chinook
chinook per
In 1956,
1966, there
there were 43 fall
per rnile
mile in
slx coastal
(faUle 5)0
the 14-year
w?rich was
r'las 10
lO above
I4-year average
which
above the
average (Table
5).
jack count
eount of
A jack
of six
six per
A
per
o
5,
5.
tJil
o
o
mll ein
Table
per mile
lflmbers of
of coho
coho salmon
the Teninile
Table 4.
in the
sal:nonper
Tenntle
4.. Numbers
grourd
Lakes
Lakes system
caLcul"ated from
fron spawning
systen calculated
epaunringground
surveys,
surveys, 1955-66
L955-66
I
Lake and
stream
system
Nqrth
North tglcp
Lake
Big
Murphy
&rrphy
Wi-lkens
Wilkens
Miles
3.0
3
.0
1,L
1.1
1.0
].
O
Average
Average
o
o
South
lake
Fopth Lake
Adalts
Adams
Benson
Benson
Johnson
Johnson
Shutters
Shut'ters
2.6
2
.6
0.9
0.9
6,0
6
.0
2.5
2.5
Fish per mile
1955-65 average
Total
Adults
Jacks
Adults
263
263
199
199
6t+
64
201
2Ol
158
158
40
. J-p-
Total
t+61+
464
357
357
1o&.104
?Jg
219
L56
156
39
39
136
L36
98
98
24
?r
355
355
25t+
254
170
170
106
106
276
276
33
33
33
33
73
73
76
?6
66
66
182
ts2
223
223
.9 9
51
5]
141
141
67
67
181
181
210
210
160
1@
370
370
126
L26
126
L26
L95
195
8?
87
97
9?
2J3
213
223
223
29_
29
1966
Jacks
136
L36
20
2A
331
33t
49
!+9
109
109
Lht
147
6
6
Average
Average
140
lt+o
99
99
239
239
90
90
Total niles
Total
miles
17.l17.1
Average number/mile
Average
nunber/nile
161
16r
3J7
117
278
278
114
Lt4
63
Qts.-
3q
o
Tab1e 5.
Table
5,
n{le calculated
per mile
Numbers
of faIL
faU chinook
Nurrbers of
chinook salmon
calsul-ated
saLnon per
from spaining
counts,
from
survey
counts,
1952-66
]";952-66
spawning ground
surrrey
erou$t
o
Nehaleni
Nehalen
a
a
o
I.
Tillamook
Ti 11anook
Bay
Bay tribs
tribs.
Nestucca
Nestucca
Siletz
$lletz
Yaquina
Yaquina
Alsea
Alsea
4.0
4"0
32
32
I9
41
l+1
3 5
3.5
2.3
2.3
4.0
4"0
7
7.88
10.5
10.5
40
Iro
72
72
26
26
20
20
10
10
11
11
83
83
Total
miles
Tota1 m'iles
32.1
32.L
Average number/mile
Average
nunber/mlle
7
7
6
6
50
50
11
It
I+
4
33
33
26
26
L5
15
26
26
7
7
33
33
40
hA
3
3
l+3
43
69
'r69
L7
17
14
u
86
86
L25
125
30
30
27
111
u.
28
28
2
230
25
25
22
22
55 3 0
5
37
37
6
5n
t3
43
o
6.
6.
l1.t
'ni1e was
was one
mile
one short
ehorb of
the average.
of the
averagec Above
Above average
average counts
counts were
rrere obtained
obteined in
in all
".11
rivere
rivera except
except the
the Siletz.
counts in
SiJ-etz. Accurate
Accrrate counts
in the
the Siletz
Slletz and
Alsea rivers
rirrers
and.Alsea
a
o
were severely
by large
were
sererely hampered
lumpered by
eohoto
returns of
of coho
the hatcheries
large returns
to the
hatcherles arid
and straystraying into
ing
into nearby
nearby index
index streams.
streans.
Live
were dj-ffic{.lt
difficult to
to eeparate
separate from
from
chlnook roere
Live chinook
massesof
large masses
large
of hatchery coho.
coho.
corrnts werc
The
Siletz counts
were further
fhe $lletz
f\rrther influenced
influenced
by
consbmction of
of aa ladder
l-adder in
by construction
Creek in
in Sunshine
Sunshine Creek
in 1962.
The ladden
ladder allows
lhe
allolrs
chinook to
to spawn
farther upstream
chinook
spawr farther
upstrean and
and reduces
reduees the
the number
fomerly spawning
spawning
nurnberformerly
below the
the falls
faLl.e in
the index
below
Jn the
lndex area.
Br€&r
a
Both the
the Nestucca
bay tributaries
the highest
Both
Nestucea and
tnl^butarj-es showed
showedthe
and Tillamook
?iJ-l-anookbay
highest
increase
increase over
ov€r average
aperage counts.
counts.
the Nestucca
The
count in
in the
Nestucca was
was high
higlr for
for the
the
The count
second successive
zuccessive year
second
year and
was 42
ard r.raE
fish above
the 14-year
above the
l4-year average
83
average of 83
42 fish
o
rq:il e'
per mile.
chinook per
chinook
Snrin&
pring chinook
e&hook
o
grourd surveys
Only
two sprlng
spring chinook
0r:1y trro
chLrrookper
per ml.le
mile were
were recorded
recorded in
in spawning ground
surveys
(Table 6).
per mile
m{-1e(Table
tn 1966
in
1965 compared
corpar.edto
to an
an average
averagp of
6).
of 10
10 per
Counts
Corrnts of
of spring
spring
chinook
chinook ranged
ranged from zero
on the SlLetz
Siletz to
to five
per rni'ls
mile on
Nestucca
zero on
flve fish
fish per
sn the Nesbucca
a
River.
River.
general decline
1958r there
there has
has been
been aa general
Since
Slnee 1958,
decline
in
in
counts of
the
the counts
of spring
spring
chinook and
these were
the lowest
and these
i:r 1953.
chinook
were the
were established
1953.
J.owestsince
since surveys
$rryeys were
estab.Lj.shedin
prevented fish
The exbreiuely
extrmely low
The
lc*rfLows
flowsduring
during the
the sumer
sumner of
of L9(S
1966 nay
may have
have prevented
fish
o
fron moving
movlrrg into
the survey
from
lnto the
to spawn.
survey areas
areas to
sparorr.
Chum
CJr,m
ground surveys
Spawning
Spalrning ground
for chum
chrrmsalmon
three drainage
surveys for
sal-non are
in three
are made
nade in
dra^inage
a
basins:
basins:
*lllanook, Nestucca
Bay.
Tillaznook,
Nestucca River,
River, and
and Netarts
Netarts Bay.
A
A supplemental
zuppl,menta3-
surrey was
Bay counts
added in
in 1960
f96O to
survey
was added
to the
the Tillamook
Tj.Llanook Bay
counts to
to strengthen
str€ngthen counts
corrnts
o
prior standard
obtained
obtained in
ln prior
standard survey
unite.
sufl/ey units
per mile
three basins
basins was
fish per
belorv the
three
was 144
L44 fish
nil-e and
and 34
f,ish below
the 13-year
3"1-year average
everage
td fish
(Table
(Table
o
jrt the
Ihe
The peak
peak count
of chum
the
count of
chr.rmin
?),
7).
The Ne
Nestuoca
The
stucca ftlven
River corrnt
count w-al
was 2J+
24 fish
fish per
per u'i]e
mile above
above average
average
o
7,
fl
7.
71
1-.
1
r
I
Table 6.
Table
6.
It
Nrrubers of
per mile
of spring
chinook per
Numbers
sprl.rrg chinook
e1}e calculated
calcrrLated
glound
fron
from spawning
spawnlrrg ground survey
counts, 1953-66
suruey counts,
L9|3-66
o
o
o
Ti.llanook
TillaniookBay
Bay
tribs.
tribe,
Nestucca
Nestucca
$iletz
Silete
Alsea
Alsea
10.5
IO.5
9
9
2
2
11
lJ-
2
2
1
I
3
3
1.5
L.5
2.5
2,5
11.5
IL.5
33
33
6
6
6
6
4
4
1
1
1
L
37
37
5
7
7
7
7
5
0
2
1
I
0
0
0
0
0
o
2
8
6
2
2
10
10
2
0
0
2
TotaL
Total niles
miles
26,0
26"0
Average number/mile
Average
nunrber/niJ.e
TabLe7.
Table
?.
o
Nunbers
Numbers of
of chum
chun salmon
per rnile
mile calculated
cal-culated from
fron
saLmonper
gror:nd survey
spawning
sparnlng ground
counts, 1953-66
L953-66
sulvey counts,
of
Miles of
l{iles
standard
survey
River
o
6
6
Average
of
Average number
n:mber of
fish per mile
1953-65
1966
T'iLLa,nookBay
Tillamook
Bay tribe.
tribs.
2.3
2.3
L6?
167
207
207
Nestucca
Nestucca
1.8
1.8
76
76
Netarts Bay
Netarts
Bay
0.4
O
'4
699
699
793
793
178
178
Ll+4
144
y
5.4w
5.4
65
65
265
265
rco
100
o
Average
Average number/mile
mtnAe{wle ful/
v
Srrpplementa-lsurveys
establlshed in
/ Supplemental
1960-6-year average
zunreyo established
in L96o-6-year
average data.
data.
o
2//
ml16 supplemental
Excludesthe
the 5.4
Excludes
Bay.
TjJlamook Baf.
suryey in
in Tillanook
Eqpplenental survey
5.4 mile
p'iLe above
(trtetarts Bay)
per mile
Creek (Netarts
and
contrast,
and Wtriskey
Whiskey Creek
Bay) 94
fish per
In contrast,
above average.
av€r&ger In
94 fish
o
the
Ttllanook Bay
the Tillaanook
Bay counte
counts uere
were 102
102 fish
fish per
per rnl-le
mile belorlr
below the
the $-year
13-year average,
average.
However,
However, the
the aurdliary
auxiliary fish*per-nile
fish-per-mile count
count inin Ttllamook
Tilamook Bay
Bay waE
was 265
265 or
or 5S
58
above
above the
the 6-year
6-year average.
averag€,
o
Prior to
giLl-net fishery
to 1962,
LQ62,aa commercial
comercia'l gill-net
fishery for
chumexisted
Prior
in TiILaTillafor chum
exist6din
mook
mookBay.
Bay.
corunerclpLlandings
The commercial
Landings were
The
were sampled
for sex,
and size
salpled for
sex, age,
age, and
sLze
a
8.
8.
, l
compositj.on.
composition. A
A severe
protrpted closure
severe decline
decline in
ln landings
landengs and
ard escapement
escatr)enentprompted
closure
of
the fishery
of the
fishery after
after the 1961
1961 season.
season! Since
since 1961, all
information on
on the
the
alL information
O
jn tributaries
status of
of chum
chumstocks
stocks has
status
been obtained
has been
obtained in
tributaries of
of the bay.
A
total of
of 152
L52 chum
chr:msalmon
A total
sal$on was
TilLanook Bay
Bay tributaries
$,as sampled
sanpled in
in Tillamook
tributaries
in 1966.
in
L966.
o
the fish
fish ranged
ranged in
in size
frcn 24
The
size from
to 35
itches and
24 to
the sex
rati-o
and the
sex ratio
35 inches
was 48%
mal-esand
was
and 52%
femaLes. Age
composition consisted
consisted of
Age composition
af 28.3%
28,J783-year
4€6 males
52frfemales.
3-year
jn 1963)
(progeny of
olds
per mile
of 288
288 fish
(progeny
fish per
olds (progeny
mile in
1953) and
wd 71.7%
oLds (progeny
?I"71( 4-year
t-year olds
jrr 1962).
rrrile in
jra the
per mile
of
fish per
of {08
408 fish
predonrinated in
L962)o Four-year-old
Four-year-old chum
chumpredominated
the run
run
o
)n 1966
(taUte 8).
1966 at
at nearly
in
nearly the
the same
mne ratio
ratio as
8).
as 1963
1963 (Table
The
dominance of
I?re doruinanee
of
fish has
has occurred
occurred three
years, but
three times
ti.mes in
irr the
4-year
4-year fish
the last
last 44 years,
but not at
at all
all
fron 1959-62.
from
1959-62,
o
fl
o
o
o
o
Table
8.
Tabl-e8.
Estfunated age
Estimated
Tillamook Bay
Bay
composition of
age composition
of TAllasrook
chum
chum salmon,
1947-66
sahon, 1947-66
Number
sampled
Year
Per cent composjtjoy age group
3
4
32.3
32.3
4.6
l+"6
7705
77.5
66.2
66.2
95.4
95.1+
2101
el,1
48.0
t€.0
5
(Sil. net)
ComercjaL fishery
Coimneroial
fishery samples
samples (gill
net)
1947
L9tfl
19t+9
1949
1950
1950
L959
1959
1960
L960
L96I
1961
ground samples
Spawning
Spawning ground
samp"Les
1962
L962
1963
L963
1964
]964
L965
1965
1966
L966
6802
58,2
83.4
8.4
30.8
30.8
16.0
16.0
1.5
1.5
0.3
0"3
I"5
1.5
0.8
0,8
1.0
1.0
0.6
0.6
82.1
92.1
28.0
28.O
85.5
85.5
It7
47.1
"L
28.3
28"3
L7.6
17.6
72.0
72,O
13.8
52.9
52.9
71.7
TL"7
0.3
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.6
0.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
51.2
51.2
ground surveys
Additional
information
Additional information
on spawning
spawning ground
and status
surveys and
of chum
chun
status of
stocks
contained in
stocks is
is contained
in a
sick entitLed,
entitled, ttspawni.rtg
"Spawning
a report
report by Delbert
Del-berb Skee
$keeslck
Fish Surveys
Coasta-l Watersheds,
Fish
Surrreys in
in Coastal
Watersheds, 1966."
L966.tr
o
o
9'
9.
Inventory and
and Obstruction
Strearn Surveys
Sunreye
Inventory
Obstruction Strewn
Inventory snd
stream surveys
phystca,L
surrrey: are made
Inventory
and obstruction
obstruction strewn
made to
to assess
aesess the
the physical
o
conditi"on and
saLmon,locate
condition
and potenti.al
potential for
for producing
producing salmon,
locate barriers,
barriers, trace
trace disdistribution
of salmon,
sal-mon,arid
and evaluate
tribution of
evaluate larown
known obstnrctions
obstructions for
for posslble
possible renediaL
remedial
actiono
action.
o
Nearly all
rnaJorstreams
all major
streane have
been surveyed
have been
surrreyedsince
Nearly
since 1947
except the
194? except
jnaccessible streams
urpqua, Rogue,
and some
sone inaccessible
strea,ns along
the south
along the
Umpqua,
Rogue, and
south coast.
coasb. In
!r
1966-67, 14
14 strewn
strean flrrveys
1966-67,
miras Trere
corpleted, in
surveys totaling
totaling 37.2 miles
were completed
in eight
eight
(tauLe 9).
coastal" drainages
coastal
drainages (Table
9).
o
sur\reys
investigatj.on.
surveys is
is availabl-e
available in
in the
the fjJ-es
files of
of this
this investigation.
TabLe 9.
Table
9.
o
Watershed
Watershed
NehaLem
Nehalem
SiLetz
Siletz
o
o
gurveys and
Inventory surveys
and obstruction
obEtnrction surveys
irr coastal
coastal
Inventory
flrfieys in
etrea^ms,July
July l,1, 1966
L966 -- June
Jr:ne 30,
l-95?
streams,
1967
30,
__
Stfeam
Stream
AIsea
Alsea
Big
Big Creek
Floras Creek
Floras
Plsbol
Pistol Birrer
River
Winchuck River
ltlver
Winchuck
0"5
0.5
Surrreyor
Surveyor
3.8
3.
Isaac
Isaac
Isaac,
Isaac, l,firry
Murry
Creek !//
Creek
3.2
3.2
Ioaac, Skeesick
Isaac,
Skeesick
Creekt//
Creek
3.6
3.6
0
.5
0.5
2"1+
2.4
1.0
l.o
L.2
1.2
Skeesick,
Murry
Skeesick, Isaac,
Isaac, lfurr1y
Olalla Creek
Creek
West
West Olalla
Inlill Creek
Creek
Mill
CowCreek
Cow
Creek #L
#1
Green
R:iver
Green River
Big Creek
Cneek&& tribs.
Big
tribs.
West
West Fork
Main
Main stem
sten
East Fork
East
North
North Fork
East Fork
Fork
East
6.j
6.3
2.3
2,3
O.3
0.3
5.0
5.0
1.4
1,4
5.7
5.7
Isaac, Rousseau
Isaac,
Rousseau/ /
ilIt
Murry
Murry
Ifurry
Murry
l{urrtrr, Isaac
Isaac
Murry,
Montagne, Stauffer
Montague,
Stauffer
if
tt
fl
II
ntt
iltt
It
tt
tt
(ttr surveys)
37.2
surveys)
37"2(14
Total
Total rLJ"les
miles surveyed
srrrrreyed
a
Itiles
Miles
surveyed
Creek
Sager Creek
Sager
S. F.,
SchoonerCrk.
Crk.
S.
F.1 Schooner
N. Fo,
F., B5.g
Big Rock
Rock
Fo, Schooner
N. F,,
Schooner
Yaquina
Yaquina
o
Tnforsation concerning
concernjng these and
and prior
Information
prior
v
u
Obstructlon resurveys.
resunr€ys.
J Obstruction
persorureL.
Jolnt survey
with Oregon
OregonGame
GaneCommission
sunreywith
/ Joint
CowrisEion personnel.
Shad and Striped
Strtped Bass
Baos
Shad
o
bass were
Shad and striped
striped bass
Shad
from
llrere harvested
harvested commercially
comercial-\r
fron the
the Biuslaw,
Stuslaw,
(tlrygua tributary),
sntth (Uxnpqua
Smith
tributary), unpqua,
Uznpqua, coos,
Coos, and
and coquiale
Coquille rlvers.
rivers.
o
Biologica.l
Biological
o
.
10"
10.
data were
colJected at
bqying stations.
data
were collected
at buying
stations.
Iogbooks were
Logbooks
were najntained
maintained by
by cootrlcoop
erating fishermen
fi.shetmen and
Ls.nding and
and landing
erating
license statistics
were obtained
aradLicense
statistics lrere
obtalned from
J?om
o
Fish Conmiission
Comri.ssionfiles.
fLtres.
Fish
Total shad
le'ndlngs from
shad landings
from the
the streams
pounds
Total
streans increased
lncreased from
fron 518,010
Jl8roJ.Opounds
o
ln
(f'feure t)
in 1965
1965 to
to 55010€3
550,083 pounds
pounds in
1966 (Figure
1). Bass
fu 1956
Bass landings
l"andlnge increased
lncreaeed
"
portrds in
fron 41,466
to 48,282
IBr2& pounds
period.
from
ln the
the same
4Lr466 to
sane period.
Slpslaq
River
s1aw River
o
the l-966
shsd J.ardlngs
ln the
the Siuslaw
SiusLaw River
Eiver rpene
The
1966 shad
landings in
were l5r32J.
15,321 pounds
pounds and
and
l+t856
4,856 porurds
pounds belot
below those
those of
1965. Licenses
ta 16
of 1955.
Licenses decreased
decreased 25%
259lto
t6 while
r*riLe the
the
daiLy average
per fisherman
&verage catch
catch per
fieherman remained
reeained about
daily
about the
the same.
T?reproportion
proportion
same. The
o
of repeat
repeat spaners
spawnersdecreased
decneased4%4i6for
tor females
females and
of
16Sfor
for males.
rnales.
and16%
Strtped baes
28J pounds
Striped
bass landings
landings were
were 283
pounds in
irr 1966.
L966.
Smith Rlver
River
$mith
o
$had landings
landings increased
pounds in
increased from
pounds
fron 58,163
Shad
I96j to
to 81,063
81r06j pounds
in 1965
581163pounds
in
in Smith
River.
in 1966
1966 in
frdth River.
Gear licenseg
to J2
Gear
licenses increased
increased by
by 19
32 in
1966 but
in 1966
19 to
dai-ly catch
per net day.
catch dropped
dropped from
frona 49.7
to 32.3
daily
shad per
day.
49.7 to
32.3 shad
o
There was
There
was a
a high
proportion
qaaes which
r'epeat spawners
of repeat
spawners but
but few
proportion of
few age
age 33 males
wtrich suggests
zuggests aa somewhat
someffhat
stts,Iler number
rnrnber of
smaller
of age
age 44 shad
shadin
in 1967.
196?.
jrl 1966.
Striped bass
porrndsin
11839 pounds
Striped
bass landings
landings were
were 1,839
1966.
fl
o
Unpqua_River
Umpqua
River
The
shad landings
The shad
landings frono
from the
the ump$a
Umpqua River
River in
1966 r*ere
were 366rtfs
366,778 porurds
pounds
in L966
n
o
and 29,782
porrndsabove
29r?tZ pounds
and
above the
ttre 1965
L965 catch.
catch.
I,icenses decreased
decreased 12%
lZyLto
bo 28
Licenses
28
while the
the average
average daily
datJ.y catch
catch increased
increased 21%
per fisherman.
while
?f% to
to 90.5
shad per
fishexuarlr
90.5 shad
Of the
the females
fesnal-eslanded
Landedin
tn 1966,
1956, 63.8%
Of
compared to
to 33.jfi
33.5% in
in l-:g6j.
1965.
63.ffi were
lrere age
&ge4.
{ compared
a
o
A high
high incidence
ineidence of
of diseased
diseased shad
A
nay be
be contributing
contributing to
shad may
to the
the reduced
reduced number
nurnber
of repeat
repeat spawning
of
fenales.
spawnlngfemales.
0
S
rl
Qq
r-l
700-
g:H,'g g.R.8 .,
pEr{8 JO spunod J:o spussnoqtr
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
Y-i
I
(
i
1950
Year
i
1955
I
\
1945
I
(
1940
I
-
I
V
I
I
/
1960
\ ,.-/
)
tud
al
od
Hr{
-\
rl
o
h
6
.d
o
F!.
Figure 1.
I
I
I
/
19651
ii
.c
+)
c{
o
g
+l
=
o
ul
0)
6
((l
H
['l
0)
+J
o
g
o
bt)
o
g
o
6
cl
S{
q{
rd
o
E!
d
o
ut
a
0)
g
'r{ r
t{ \O
+)l
nC\
CA
rt o\
gr{
€
.i
'tJ&
dq,
d
,dlc >
.r{
m-o
rd-El
pq
q{
od
.d
A{ cJ
Pounds of shad and striped bass landed from Oregon streams south of the
Columbia River, 1933-65
I
)
p...
\
1935
II
'\
)
'
€
,
-l
100
I
(
--
1
cl
d
(\dJ
V
II
1
I
-0
-100
150
200
250
r{
200-
/
/
t
300-
/
I
400
I
I
>
Shad
rl
500-
a600
Ea8
,*t*
80C-
-
-
f
* b :
1,000
1,1CC)
1,200-
A
11
S
89,8
(\l
u
1,300
S
4
°
i4
,0
sseq pedTr+e Jo spunod Jo spuesnoq;,
F3
oo
P
S
o
12.
72.
Strtped
increased fron
Striped bass
bass landlngs
landings increased
from 101390
10,390 pounds
pounds !x
in 1965
1965 ta
to 13,564
L3r56t*
porurdsin
pounds
in 1966.
1966.
c
CoosRiver
Coos
pounds
pormds to
Shad landings
to 72,521
Shad
landings in
River declined
in Coos
Coos River
decllned 26,802
26r&2 pounds
72$& pounds
a
in
in 1966,
1966.
Gear licenses
88 in
Gear
licenses dropped
d,ropped from
1965 to
to 69
6g in
fn 1966.
Lg66.
from 88
in 1965
catch
Daily catch
DailJ
per set
per fisherman
deqllned about three
three fish
declined
fish per
net and
shad per
flsheman day.
day.
set net
srd 14 shad
About
half of
one half
the females
fenaLes caught
the first
of the
caught in
age 4l+ and
and spawning
for the
first
in 1966 were age
spaming for
a
tine.
ttne.
the
silc<r
The proportion
proportion of
of shad first
first spawning
at age 3 nas
was the
the 1owest
lowest since
spar'unJngat
aglng started
aging
started in
in 1960.
1950"
por:nds in
to 31,938
in 1965
1955 to
Striped
lardings increased
Striped bass landings
increased from
fron 29,352
29,352 pounds
3Lt938
0
o
pounds
pounds in
in 1966.
1956.
the landings
to dominate
The
year class
The 1958
class continued
continued to
landings
1958 Srear
doninate the
of 31%
and was
was composed
rnales,
composed of
fena.les and
arLd46%
h6fi males.
3L% females
year classes
No
classes
No large
large year
year class
have entered
enterd the
the fishery
fishery since
class and
landings wiIL
will
slnce the
the 1958 year
and landings
o
probably
good year
year class
the fishery.
fishery.
probably decrease
until another
enters the
decrease untlL
class enters
another good
Coquille Ritrer
Coquille
River
j-n the
the Coquille
CoquilJe River
River in
fu 1966.
Several new
new fishermen
fishermen began setting
Several
1966.
nets in
settjrrg nets
o
gear rose
The
to 23 in
L966.
The pieces
pieces of
licensed gear
rose from
in 1966.
of licensed
from six
s$c in
in 1965 to
pornds in
1966.
Iandings
ZrJfl pounds
landings increased
pounds tro
to 14,395
increased from
frora 2,35].
ln 1966,
1J+r395pounds
per day or
per set-net
rate roras
rate
was 70
or 19 per
$had per
set-net day.
day.
?O shad
o
Shad
Shad
The
catch
The catch
proportion of
oId,
A
A high
high proportion
of old,
repeat spawning
spauring shad
repeat
was noted
noted in
shad lras
in 1966.
1956"
The Coqu.ille
CoquILLe River
The
River corrnerclal
commercial fishery
fishery landed
landed 640
640 por:nds
pounds of
of striped,
striped
bass in
in 1966.
1966,
No blologicaL
the bass landed.
No
biological information
was taken
was
taken from
frou the
Landed.
inforuation
a
Rearing Studies
Lake Rearing
Studies
jnfo:sration
ptential
Studies
designed to
provide information
on the
of
Studies deslgned
to p:rov:ide
the potential
of coastal
coasba.l
o
o
r.eari:ng areas
lakes as supplemental
lakes
been under
supplaoenta-l- rearing
ar'eas have
have been
under way
way since
since 1960.
1g&.
The
The
psogsramhas
centered on
hes centered
on a series
program
chain
series of
of lakes
lakes forming
foruing an
interconnected
an interconnected
chain
o
13.
13.
(ffgure 2).
Eel. Lake
the Terunile
a).
above
Lake sygt€n
system (Figure
abve Eel
in the
Tetrnlle la,lce
Ielce in
Releases
try
coho fty
fteLeaEesof
of coho
(fggO-ge) o
yrears (1960-62).
uere made
llal-l and
the first
fi.rst 33 years
were
nade in
ard Schuttpelz
Schuttpel-z lakes
tn the
in Hall
Lakes in
o
(fp6l), coho
(Cnear, &Ira,
year (1963),
the 4th
the
were stocked
Edna,
coho fry
fry uere
lalseE (Clear,
all lakes
ln all
sbocked in
4th year
arid fbLL)
Hall) except
except Sclnrttpe3.z
Schuttpelz l€ke.
Lake
and
In
lrl
Teal,
TeaI,
conflned to
to
Since
was confined
L963, the
the study
Etu{y wae
Slnce 1963,
$aLLLake
tske and
Hall
were stocked
a,ndfingerling
fingerljrrg rather
rather than
ln the
the lake.
lake.
than fry
frff coho
stoctrredin
coho uere
e
progran has
planting
provided data
the rearing
the size
mte of
of planting
The
rearlng program
has provided
on the
else and
anl rate
deta on
grolrth,
for optimnn
opttnara yleld,
for
yield, survival,
su:srival, growth,
of returning
returring adults.
adulte.
and number
runber of
Supple$uppl-e-
plan!*on popupqpumental
nentaL information
inforoation was
featrrres and
was obtained
obte-lned on
l$rro1oglca,l features
and plankton
on 1imnological
t
lations.
lations.
Dqqgbregn nler+.nts
Downatreani
migrants
the spring
In
In the
sprtng of
of
t
yearLlngs (1965
corrnted in
the
were counted
1967, 668
66 yearlings
ln the
196?,
tf:g65 brood) rrere
dornstrean"atgrant
of, Hall
llalL Lake
lake.
dawnstream-migrant trap
trap at
the outlet
outlet of
at the
The survival
rate wae
was
surri\ral rate
The
(?atte 10).
3.3%
of the
the 20,000
20r00O originally
origlna-lly stocked
tlalt Lake
l,are (Table
Lo).
ln Hall
stocked in
3$16 of
o
The
migrants
The ntgrants
grarns.
had a nean
ueight was
20,0 grams.
mean lengbh
length of
of 127.6
127.6mmmand
andthe
theca].cuLatd
:calted average
was 20.0
anerageweight
f\r:ther
coho in
end.no
no further
Hall
Lake ruas
was rrot
xot restocked
With juvenile
Iia,Ll l.e,ke
in 1967
restoclced rrith
L967 and
Junenjle coho
p:Lannedon
i.e planned
on the
work is
the lake.
uorlc
lalce.
a
Adult returns
^A*iLh_returns
l{atule coho
Mature
coho returning
from those
those released
neLeasedat
tlall Lake
Lalce and
retrrrnilg from
at Hall
naturraL
end natural
stocks in
in Clear
CJ-esr Creek
were treppd,
trapped L/2
1/2 nlLe
mile downstream
lhlL l,ake,
Lake. A
stocke
Creek nere
fbon Hall
A
dor'ngtr.ean from
I
tota.l- of
of 106
coho entered
entered the
betrreen December
total
1O6 coho
Febnrary 10,
L0,
the trap
trap between
Decenbet 5,
and February
L966r and
5, 1966,
1967.
L96?.
(Il? adults
The total
captured consisted
total captured
The
consisted of
of 102
L02 unmarked
ururarked fish
figh (47
and 55
adults and
55
jacks) and
and 4
4 aduLts
adults from
the 1963
bnood marked
ventrsl,.
tbom the
1963 brood
narkd left
left ventral.
Jaclcs)
o
The
Ttre count
count of
of
("g 22)
22) ffas
rpstreem between
betnreen
jacks
was a
minimal number
a ni:rj:na3.
fi.eh escaped
eecaped upstream
soee fish
nunber since
since some
Jacks (age
(1 frear
pickets and
the
the pickets
were not
The narked.
marked coho
were ag€
age 32 (1
and were
counted,. The
not counted.
coho ?ile{re
year
2
o
fresh
water and
fresh lrater
and 22 years
ocean).
]'ears ocean).
The
fronc the
The aftflt
adult return
the 1963
1963 brood
return from
represents
repreeents 0.5%
O.sfi of
of the 850
5O Juve.niles
juveniles rpJeaeed
released bdlol'r
below llalt
Hall l,ake
Lake (Taute
(TableLL).
U).
No jacks
from the
the 1963
J-p6Jbrood
brood were
No
uene found
forrnd in
trap.
the trap.
in the
Jacks from
I
o
J.l+.
14.
,'
Reedsport
c
o
Schuttpel-z
Lake
Lake
Dol,nrstream -J
miglant trap
&
.q
r-f
()
bpstream
tIpstream
nigrantt*1
migrant trap
g#
c)'/
o1
"l
:l
:l
/'
s!
Tenn:i-Le
I
Lakeside
49 Lakeside
4.*
r{l
f-1,4
L.
u.2
q
\_
rI
North
North Bend
Figure
2.
F5-gure 2.
Etlnat
of Clear,
Glearr Edna,
Location
dratnage systemr
systn of
Location and drainage
lhll lakes
l-akes
Teal,
and Rail
SchuttPe1z, and
TeaJ., Schuttpelz,
S
o
95.4
(\|f|.^oltOO
C*OC-r{OIN
"
I
C\
c^
q
.a
(f\Fl
i
I
!\
O
Fl -l
r{
rl
rl
f;
rl
rl
fll
Hail
a
F{
o
o
o
P{
+t
a
rl
1961
rl
1959
1960
-l
h
HaU
Lake
a
6v1
\O
R8 6$'S5, Ofr€€
$O i
O\O\O\O.O\O\
\O\O.
rl
migration.
E
d
l*l
(d
rl
Fl
F{
d
;
/ Includes Clear, Edna, Teal, and Hall lakes.
1962
1963
1961
S
.rle 3
F
p"
a
^
1,787,600 3/7-4/4/63
a,q.q
/ Fish reared in Schuttpelz Lake and released into Hall Lake as yearlings to continue
'8
rl(\lcr\
\O\O\O
O. C}. O.
Flrlrt
N
Fl
e
0.2
g* .5
\
c{o \BN
o
oo.*\
o
q8E8S*o
}oc)Qtorc|
(\cf\-t
\o
1964
1965
Fl F{ -l
o
+t
oo
'
5/20/66
s.-\€S{.{.
1959
1960
1961
1963
-o
,E
1959
1960
1961
d
3,004 107
16
11
420
656
210
2,476
dF:
F{
R8€
SOO
3j Approximately 7,000 fish kifled on out1et screen or escaped downstrean soon after planting.
survival is computed on the basis of 100,000 fry.
0
668
1,221
45
r,r\o
dFlS\.€OO
rl \..C1 \O r{ (V
\(\\\\\
rnl.\\
r
cn
F{t
F{
+)^OO
O\O
\O
\
\rn
-rl
\.
*€t
,q.a
ql
OFl
ol
25/60
r\,
:9tr,\O.
olol(U
Schuttpelz
o
Brood
a
o
Fl
3,111
2,686
667
436
668
1,221
519
861
856
2,323
0
*
tro
Bh
'15
ts
I
t
Per cent
47.8
81.3
4.3
3.3
2.3
0,7
7.2
1.2
2.0
576
861
q
HP
Orl
5C
od
*#
All lakes / 1962
Table 10.
Fs
rn .rl
888
\o(\Fl
sl
116
o0)
ot
-F{ rl Ol
\\\
C\(YV.f\
o+t
a
HFr
457/
El +t
o
C-+
f\
iq{.
dAcn
C)
()Fl
1,396/
h$
ql tl
\o
3,305/Spring
ut
C)\O
r{ rn
Ol \O
20,000
o
tt)
ql
Number
planted
tH
Date
>o
a
tf\
or{ol
o3
t6
.r?
-ff
rlO
r{ ol
N
rn
r0
29,100 5/23/62
Fl +t
.r{ O
Hd
I
(\
\o
OE
oau
o
O f'{
o
F{
\O
rlO
5/6/64
A
E
e
c>
5/18/65
.Fl
C!
12,012
28,222
oo
€+)
og
odt
ktu
pu0
(\|
{J
c
oo
-*
rl
c
g
C-
-t or\
N'
0
+)
Ct
t0
.r{
(u0
o-*
OFcL r{
r
e0
.E:
dtu
+)
tr
cFi
a!
RS
-s
o
.r{
bf;
+t
cf\
26,600 3/11/60
25,300 3/18/61
o
Irl
g
c
q€
Fl
5/28 & 6/1/62
oo\
+'l-l
ul
0)
()
go
Or{
ol
C!
75,000
O\O
i
Cn
o 6\o
\o
0
474
EY
Jao
q
4
2,323
C*
Fl
Fl
-i
Ol
rl
852
.r't
\g C!\O
e\O c\
\O\O -t
n
CV
72,800 ,3/U &
I
o
q
i
Cr\ F{
107,00cJ 3/17/61
o
.0
o
()
q
.q
\O q O. rl F{ O
5Ol r{\O Ct\9
@ (\ n aO C{\O
103
+l
!a C*\g
calAC*
\O \ rn
20
473
t
t
o
70
F{
dSn
o
f.r
1,517
fi
c:
Tt f
A{c
3,563
a
o
13.7
6.1
Thtzi Pr
.6
a
$**
Count at traps
1963 196A. 1965
c)
fi
.:J
1962
)
1961
o
g
q Tt.Y ST
r{Noc!-rtcrl
1966
c)
o
c)
Summary of juvenile coho broods stocked in coastal lakes and recovered
in traps as donatream migrants, 1960-67
.td
1967
a
o
t'! q
3,633
1,537
nf.
.
15.
.98 rlE r{#
r|r{
6+6 g
j
8e
E
H
.rl
At
8$
o
H.o
.r{O
#
Fl
JlE
E
qt
i
r{
s+'
$
g. F{
.fr8 "5
${
g+tct
+)-
q
gf €
#;
b:g .n
.Oit{
PtO
r-l
rl
d
O
,H'SE 8
qr
ES €s g
EiFl
F.i
d
d
sa H ,!
h
hh
t
16.
15.
?able 11.
Table
Ll.
lfil$ers of
of marked
narked juvenile
Nwnbers
coho released
released from
fro& the
JuveniJe coho
tnap at
IIaLL Lalce
at Rail
trap
Lake and
and
and subsequent
subseqrent adult
edu.lt ard jack
Jack
returne, 1959-63
yeare
LgSg-03brood
returns,
brood years
S
o
catlon of
Classification
of
tota.l returns
total
returrrs
released
lltgnber juvenile
.iuveniLeE8 released
. Number
frroocl
Brood
Yearlea,rz;-yea,x
2-year
2
Per cent
Per
cent
33
2
Total
V
a
O
1959
L959
1960
1960
1961
1961
L962
1962
1963
L963
1964
L96l+
239
239
29
126
J26
3,216
3186
219&
2,960
886
885
2r95Q
2,950
w
10?
107
0
0
0
0
850
850
j -rL 7 3
1,173
3,455
3,455
2,989
2t9q
1,012
IrOl2
3,057
3 rO57
850
850
2
2
0
o
0
0
3
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
l . J + L10 & 0
333 44
3
2 2 2 9293 3 537 3
22
2
55 3 3 2
3 1 33
1 4 L tU
lr-fr 1 1
14
0
33 1 0 014 0
1,17300---111?3 o o
80
57
13
30
4
-
2.3
2.3
l1.9
,g
1.3
1.3
1.0
Lo0
0.5
0.5
-
N0TE:
NOTE: BroodE
f,rcn 1959
througb 1961
reared in
Broods from
1959 through
were reared
l95L were
in Hall
lb,ll and
$chuttpelz
and Schuttpelz
lakes.
Iakes. The
L962 brood
The 1962
brood wae
was reared
Edna, Teal,
rear€d in
ln Clear,
Glear, trdna,
lb-1L lakes.
Tea.L,and
and Hall
lakes.
o
Additlonal details
progress report
detalls can
can be
be found
forrnd in
by Alan
Additional
NcGie
report by
Alan 14.
in aa progress
U. McGie
ttlrlatural Rearing
on "Natural
(irl
Rearlng of
of 19631963- and
on
1964-Brood Coho
CohoSalmon
in Hail
thl]. Lake"
l,aker (in
attrd1964-Brood
Salnon in
preparatlon).
preparation).
o
Populatlon EstLuates
of Coho
Population
Estimates of
CohoFingerlings
Fingerll$gs
The study
of juvenile
poptrlations in
study of
coho populations
The
ln six
in tributaries
trlbuteriee
eix streams
streane in
Juvenlle coho
o
of
Nehalemn,ltilson,
Wi.Isonr and
of the
the Nehalem,
and Iaqrrfua
Yaquina riverg
rivers contlnued
continued tn
in lT
FY 3;967,
1967, using
using the
the
forrat established
format
establlshed in
in 1963.
L963,
Ihe progran
The
program was
was designed
desiied to
to measure
measureannual
annua"I
fluetuatLons in
ln the
the abundance
abundanceof
fluctuations
of juvenile
eoho and
rel-etlonehips with
ralth the
the
and relationships
Juvenlle coho
I
parents or
nurnber
number of
of parents
or environmental
€nvLrgnmenta-lconditions.
condltions.
conducted in
The
The studies
in
strrdies are conducted
standard
standard index
index areas msasuring
measuring 2,500
2r5c[--feet.
feet.
In August
1966 the
the ntuber
In
August 1966
number of
of juveniles
in the index
index sections
sections varied
varted
Juneniles in
o
betueen 1,313
(tletraten River)
1r3I3 in
in Humbug
HlrnbugCreek
Creek (Nehalem
the upper
between
Rlver) and
end6,627
61627in
in the
upp€r Yaquina
Iaqrrina
(faUle 12).
River
River (Table
te).
populations occurred
Larger than
than usual
usrial populations
Cedar Creek
Creelt
Larger
occurred in
ln Cedar
tributary, North
North Fork
Fork of
of Wolf
the upper
tributary,
Wolf Creek,
Creek, and
upper Yaquina
and the
Xaquina River sections
sectiong
even though
though stream
flous were
strean flows
even
were lower
lor*er than usual in
these streams.
ln these
strear[s.
I
.
H
!? .
I
tl
I
ll
I
tl
It
I
I
I
I
I
C*.1
I
| @\O Fl O
-ldr{d
ll
FlOf
tt
dr{r{-l
caeaaaaa
18.3
16.5
11.2
10.7
\O (nC\\O
rl
7.7
16.5
t
6.8
o cnc.\o | -+o.o.\o
3.8
I (\rr\c\l
I
I
I
I
o aoa.t ca cl ca ar o\
O\Olrnto
Ct-$OlC\|
I
f;&
River index
stream
a
dl
E.{
+)
L)
ft
(d
i5
(D
lg
c)
5,292-5,635
4,645-5,084
3,808-4,342
4,936-5, 514
2,196-2,579
1,694-1,957
1,627-1,809
1,242-1,389
928-1,022
1,391-1,559
1,404-1,537
2,233-2,608
2,404-2,773
2,154-2,710
2,952-3,496
2,954-3,398
1,904-2,174
.q
l
q
6
a
a
.6
-ifr
q.l
^
q
^
-tcn
I
q
.6
cnNN\O
I r{
CnOl
(Y\l
htO\Or{
-{\
tr\\O
Ot-ift0O
'n
i,^
i
t$u\*t-*
RFB$ ' fiddd,
.e.n
a
n
r{r.l({
I
.t,6.q
I C\iH11
i
r{l
I
| @O.C{C'rlC*OIOl
| -*r{rl\O
3,418
3,179
2,122
6,627
Cf\I\-\O
5,247
5,458
4,856
4,061
O
2,351
1,813
1,712
1,313
980
1,473
1,467
2,416
3,206
3,144
|
.Q.6
6
^
| cf\cnc!\o
l
I
I
o
t4
o
Jd
$
14
(,l
i
r-l
.d
P
o
a
I Cn -t tn\O
I
\O\O\O \O
I O\O.O.or.l
-{-{td,
I
cn -t \ \o
I (\-t
oo.o\o\
| o\o\o\o.
1963
1964
1965
1966
I
I
T
I
I
Jd
3{
cq -t !f\\O
\O\O\O\O
o.O\c}.O.
t-{r{rlr{
I
1963
1964
1965
1966
I
I cr1 -t tn\O
\O.\O\O\O
I O.(}.(}.O'
trlrlrl
,
fiel#
n l5
,:4
o
0)
t{
a
ol
to
cf1 c!
ess8 ' ddd 3
\O \O \O \O
Fl rl
rl
rl
rl
I
I
J{
I
I
I
lf{
I
I
o
o
F.
(J
tr{
r-l
o
t
0) J{
I t .r{
s
h
r€
.o
&{
lrl
I,g
r6
ql
| ..c I
o
,a
t{
o
I
.ld
a)
0)
S{
c)
b0
5
.o
FI
E
sF
I
I
I
|
rrlJ4
QIO
>t0)
t
c0l+r
, Hl6
' .HIfi
I E{E
,sl
rn \o
\O \O \O \O
I
Grant Creek
Table 12.
a
r{
,.o
a.i.^
I NCV(\cri
JJ
3
C.\\O -i|
' il8Rj,
(s
ol
o
\
I r{
h
t{
o
r.l
1401-1,574
1,003-1,098
297-384
,l
.a
r{N
cn -if lr\\O
\O\O\O\O
O\O\O.O.
rlrlrlt
€8
.r.r
\o \o -$ cr\
I CVtfl-+r'l\Orn OlO\
|
(q c^ (\l \o
v\ rn rn -s
r rnt _ l | | rn| | r
I
\o
co
Yaciuina River
a
OF
.go
O ["r
o+J
a
o
r{ rl
.r{ d
C+)
o(,l
>d
"l
i
r{
-t rt.\ -t ct
rlcrr@-t
r \.oOC.\
**cr.cr.f
Humbug Creek
da
or.
1963
1964
1965
1966
gr{
-O^
U\\nol
dnSB
.H'31
{r pl
ool
t
Ollf\cqo
I F*-lr\O6Ol
tr\O\to cn
\O
O v\\
q
.o
a.i
i
o
ol
|
Ol r-l r{ r{
r| r{ r{ N
| | | r I I I I tl
\O dC-N
C Or { - t c n
cvo.ocf\
| o.o|\c{-tl
cF.(r\*tOl
FJ\O\O Ol
qqq.l.ra.rrl
r{dOr
tN"{*d,
Nehalem River
North Fork Wolf Creek
a
HS
'fJO.
;;l
2363
rrO
(D\o
ol
c| cr.c!€
I
2,551
a)
'
I
I
I
I
1964
1965
1966
J)
cr\o\o {o
1963
c!
d
|
Devil's Lake Fork
b0
g
.d
1d
3tl
1,045
335
1,482
2,029
C)
1963
1964
1965
1966
${
Wilson River
Cedar Creek tributary
o
95% conf i-
g
-S-+
C-C* I D-'-{O-.O\ |
O\
f!C--tcr\
Oq: @
iftnd
^
.i
^
i
n
a
|
I
(rl Ol cnq\
rl (r\r{ Oi
I I | | | | t | | r
-t
-:f-iiN -$
cnt-rl
I o!r\\nrf\
|
oo|.oO'
-$cr.
*f -{ OroF.
Oq N q n l
n,q,iql
rl
*t,OlOlcrlOl
t
Estimated
population
d
g
dt
to
Year
a
tl
+)
ul
dence limits
o
I
| tr-€o*to,
lSOlOtw\
rl$l-lOl
I
I
18.7
22.8
12.4
25.9
I
to {O rsrn
aaoclooa
! -trl
ol ct
I
ll
I
F{ v\
il
cfi
2.4
2.1
-(}.r{r.ll
I Cs Ol 3-{ O.
-.tO
\o I C-(n
.lcolclec
(n
N ol
cl
--
c
3.1
c
--
t
3,218-3,626
2,845-3,556
2,013-2,244
6,337-6,913
,
rO C*-+C*
I
I
2.7
2.3
I
3.6
o
29.0
42.9
25.0
28.3
O.
c{r-l()O
3.6
907
1.4
1.7
c
0,9
2 5
1.6
2.3
1.5
.
0.8
3.2
2.6
.
. cf\ Ol (\l r{
tl
|
1963
1964
1965
1966
f+f
:i
Eq
lrr\O 0
ol\O <rtr
I
Upper Yaquina River
rl
oco.loooel
C\l Ol C{ r{
ll
tl
14.7
19.2
19.1
16.9
F
o
Ol€
8.4
3.8
13.1
20.5
a
o
g
.rl
-*O
2.2
2.8
2.4
1,0
Stream
H
o
.rl
Standing
crop (ibs)
Juvenile coho abundance, standing crop, and stream flow in six
coastal streams, 1963-66
S
o
flow (cfs)
ng
-
a
{6
g
..1
gI'
S{
o
&
P.
b
Fl rl
-{
32.
J.8.
o
popuLations, the
To determine
f,actors regulating
the
To
detennine factors
regulating the
the abundance
of coho
coho populations,
abrrndarxceof
numbers
numbers and
were compared
and standing
standiag crops
crops were
comparedto
to the
the following
following factors:
factors:
o
(t) fow
(1)
low
(e) indices
summer
produced them,
sulrmerflows,
flows, (2)
:nafces of
nrns that
then, and
of the adult
that produced
adult runs
and,
(3)
(3) inaices
indices of
their returns
of tbeLr
returns as
as adults.
adults.
Analysis of
corrariance and
Analysis
of covariance
no significant
regression analysis
and regression
indicated no
significant
analysiE indicated
f
relationsh:ip between
relationship
between stream
flow and
either as
nu$ers or
or standing
streaur flot'r
standlng
abrnrdanceeither
as numbers
andabundance
years of
crops using
the 44 years
crops
using the
of data.
data.
found
No
reLationships were
were found
No significant
signifi-cant relationships
jadices of
between the
the indices
the numbers
numbersor
or standbetween
of spawning
standof abundance
a,bundanceof
sparnringadults
adults and
and the
o
progergr.
crops of
ing crops
the progeny.
ing
of the
The
relationship between
between 1962-.bnood
1962-brood fish
The rel-ationshtp
fish as juveJurre-
jrr 1965
niles
in 1963
and adults
niles in
1963 and
edults in
1965 was
not significant,
but there
there was
l',as aa signifwas not
significant, but
sigrrifrelationsh:ip between
icant relationship
betrreen 1963-brood
icant
1961brood fish
fish as
in 1964
196& and
and adults
adults
as juveniles
Jr:rreniles in
o
in 1966.
in
1966.
jn the report
More
More detailed
will be
detaiJ.ed information
i-nfornetion wiLlbe available
the
avaiJ-able in
report on
on the
Lg65-66 juvenile
coho study
preparation.
1965-66
in preparation.
stud,y in
Juven:iJ-ecoho
.
o
gllirtook Ecology
Fal I Chinook
Fall
Ecology
Sixes River
Sixes
B,iver
Studiee on
the ecology
on the
Studies
of juvenile
chinook salmon
ln Sixes
Rtver
ecology of
fall chinook
$i:res River
saLmonin
Juvenile fall
o
contjnued during
continued
during the
the early
early parb
part of
of the
the fiscal
fiscal ;rear.
year. Work
internrpted in
in
Work was
was interrupted
graduate student
the fall
proJect returned
falL when
the graduate
the project
returned to
the
when the
on the
to school.
student on
school.
Major
MaJor
eryhasis
emphasis during
during the
the summer
1966 was
was in
the estuary.
of [-966
ln the
$rfirer of
estuarXr.
o
,luv?n:4e
program nas
ttre spring
Juvenile growth.
Beginnifrg during
was
grorbh. Beginni.g
during the
spring months,
nonths, aa program
undertaken to
to measure
measure large
intenrals
undertaken
in
nupbers of
of juveniles
in
large nunbers
at regular
regular intervals
JuvenileE at
the estuary.
the
estuarJr.
o
jn the
portloar of
the estuary
Most
Most observatioxs
of the
estuaqr
obsenratiorls were
were in
the lower
lor'rer portion
the fish
where
wtrere the
fish were
were concentrated,
concentraled"
the
During
and early
early summer,
Drring the
the spring
spring and
sumer, the
(Figpre 3).
grourbh rate
good, g1
instantaneous growth
in ]ength
was good,
instantaneous
rate in
O.Ol07 (Figure
ltength was
3).
81 = 0.0107
From
Fron
period of
gronbh in
mid-June
mid-June until
was a period
no growth
until the
the end
end of
of Jul
Julyl there
there w&s
of essentially
in
essentially
a
(g1 = 0.0007)
grcw'rbhrate,
period of
good growth
length
length (g1
followed by another
0,000?) followed
of good
rate,
another period
g1 =
= 0.0095.
0.0095.
During the
the per{ld
pen
Drrlng
8.0
crn fork
8.0 cm
fork length.
lengfh.
o
I.
of reduced
reduced growbh,
growth, average
average size
was about
about
of
size }las
Subseque
, the
the average size
Subseqreritly,
ilcreased to
to about
12.J cm.
cm'o
about 12.5
size increased
a
S
19.
October
a
F{
0)
.o
o
+r
o
o
\o
\o
mouth of Sixes River estuary, 1966
I
a
oF.
r{
epteniDer
Hf
AH
63
tm
s
o
do
tos{
o
H
August
ru
e.fl
I
Hra
a
g
+)
g
s
cf\
the
g
,5'
+)
,5
July
o
chinook at
.+J
o
(t
lfr
Cn
.g
o
(Ee
9'-l
,{d
(€.6
-it
r(\
fafl
I
0)
cn
F{
sS
.rl
g
0)
B
Nay
o
Growth of juvenile
o
(€Lz,
Juno
o\
J4
o
o
d
.d
(rp)
Sr
ra\
.q
€
o
lr\
April
r{
Figure 3
&
o
"i
il"fr
.rl
t!.
(r uT) q18ua1 gro 8o1 T?.m?q{
ri
d
1 -
r|
1 .4
rl
1.5,
r-l
i.6.
rl
1.7
ot
1.8
ol
1.9
N
0
$l
2.0
ol
2.2
N
2
(t
2.3
ol
2.4
2.
laaarlri-aaafrca
clt
2.5
2.6
2.7
!o!rrnrf\rnrnLot|\|f\!r^\!nrr^u\rr\
66c*\orn*ta\olr_{ao.o0c*-dd$il
2.1
o
r{
a
fr.
20.
gfonth rate
A
genera"l concept
reduction in
ln growth
based on
A reduction
rrate was
uas unexpected
the general
conaept
un€lpectcd based
on the
of the
the richness
questionst
richness of
of estuaries
estuarles and
of
and raised
raised several
i:rportant questions:
severa,Limportant
a
(f) CoutC
(1)
Could the
the poprelatLon
population of
of Juveniles
juveniles ln
in SJxes
Sixes Bay
Bay have
have increaeed
increased to
to a den(e) Was
the
sity that
overtarced the
ln the
sity
Was there
that overtaxed
the food
food supply?
there aa natural
cycJ-ein
notrrra.l cycle
supply? (2)
(3) Could
important
grouth reduction
food, organisms?
organlsms? (3)
ln response
response
important food
been in
reductLon have
have been
Could growth
o
physlological processes
procesEes associated
to physiological
to salt
uater?
to
the adaptation
EaLt water?
with the
edaptation to
assoelated with
(4) wao
gror'lth because
fletr were
(4)
Was there
there simply
an apparent perlod
period of
because small
were
saL1 fish
sJnply an
of no
no growth
belng recruited
the ocean?
ocean? The
Ttre
recnrited from
for the
being
fnon upstream
werE leaving
3-eauingfor
upstream and
fLsh were
ard large
large fish
o
question was
from aa
latter
latter question
roaeexplored
firrther using comparative
data from
eoplored further
coryarative size
size data
prognln above
trapping program
in the
the ocean
trapping
the estuary
ocean surf.
surf.
ebove the
estuary and
and seining
eeining in
Trapping
lower river.
Trqp,p.lnein
ln the
the.Lq'wqr
dver.
o
A
was operated
above the
the aetuary
estuary
A trap
trap was
operated just
Juet above
part of
trapped,
the early
the stream
nas trapped,
during the
duning
early part
hal:f of
of the
etrean was
of June
,Iune 1966.
1965. About
About one
one half
gtrean divided
but the
the catches
catches were
the stream
divided
but
thougftt to be
be representative,
sd:rcethe
were thought
representattve, since
o
gizes of
gfavel island.
in
fish in
the trapped
trap,ped fish
evenly around
of the
evenly
around aa gravel
l.sJ-arrd. The
The average
average sizes
ll.
in Figure
Figure 4.
to sizes
relation
relation to
fi-sh in
the lower
of fish
in the
lor'rer estuary
estuarXl are
Ehorn in
sizes o1
are shown
could have
and could
These data
data suggest
that maller
sm1ler fish
have
fish were
downstream and
These
w€r€ moving
noving downstream
zuggest that
.
o
the
growth rate
tn the
meaeur€din
rate measured
been contributing
contrtbuting to
to the apparent
apparent reduced
been
redueed growth
estuary.
estuary.
Also,
the nout'h
mouth of,
of the
the estuarXi'
estuary
trap site
to the
.Also, sampling
frm the
the trap
site to
sanpllng from
suggested a size
increase progresslng
progressing downstrean.
downstream.
suggested
sizo lncreese
o
jn the
geJqpltng in
the ocean
Sampling
ocean surf.
Eurf.
Concurrent
to sampling
sary}{ng
Concugent to
the estuary,
estuarlyr aa
in
ln the
the ocean
oceansurf.
surf.
in the
outlet and
and in
the estuary
estuary outlet
series
of selne
seine haule
hauls was
in the
roastaken
taken in
sertes of
c@parwas comparFish size
from various
various locatlons
locations at
at high
high and
and Lou
low tlde
tide was
Flsh
ln samples
saryIes fron
size in
o
particular day
tras combined
ln Figure
Flgure 4.
day in
able
and was
eonbinedfor
for aa particular
4.
able and
the estuary.
estuary'
rrere leaving
leaving the
fish were
program, there
progran,
that larger
larger fish
indLcation that
there was
no indication
was no
Tag4ng
of juveniles.
laAqiFCof
Juyenilt*,
a
o
rdnyl
snall, vinyl
During
2r5@ small,
about 2,500
suluer about
Ihrring the summer
peffrgnt tags
to juveniles.
pennant
tags were
were applied
epplied to
Juveniles.
number.
nunber.
[1
Based
the sampling
on the
eanplfuig
Based on
unique
wtth aa unique
Each fish
r*as tagged
tagged with
flsh was
Each
plotted in
in Figure
Flgtrne 5.
gSorth of recovered
The
recovernedfish
fish is
ie plotted
5.
The growth
Only
thoee
OnIy those
I.
;
q
|-l
. a:
s\
O\
.
C0
_ ??
_
'-\au,\att_\arnOtn()r(ft
€
_. !
tr-
.r
C-
a
a
\O
I
(uo) ufSueT{ro.t
\O
It
r{.\
.
rr\
5.0
.
a
*t
4.5
Is
, *t
4.0-
(m
I
10
I
I
'1
1
o
June
t
i
20
I
I
I
25
I
O
r4
(66#
-.
I
.H
I
S._,
I
I
I
30 1
i
I
5
1.'i
I
July
r4
S -
(set
15
-1
0
r4
O
r4t
-
e'i
.-,.
I
10
I
f,
(D
o
d
o
FldO
H
h
.bfr
.po
.rl
'.|
fl
f
h
r-l
I
+t
o
€
T'
E
p
*T
Jd
O\O
O\O
$
c! o\
EFI
BF
E EE
T€
S*
.df;
€H
Average size of juvenile faU c1nook captured in the lower river, estuary, and ocean
I
LC\
C..-
-
(rog
..n
g
f!4
.r,
6
Figure 4.
I
0'
'0
S.-
,__
-#
__
$z
5
1
(sta
1
-
,.4
1s6}--*r--
5.5
'-
'-C ''C
C
r-3
(6Er)
6.0
-
0
r4r4
F
n
I
-
ggE
(axB)
CZ.
+tho
8.5
O
r.4
g8
-
f.tE
#S.
t
C.-
sgH
S
af,
9.0
_
tad
9.y
-
fFl
1O.0
$r
..
o
10.5
. Lower river trap
0 Lower estuary
4 Outflow and ocean surf
a1
olB
'f-l
gE
t{
t{ 9{
$€
surf during June and early July 1966
15
(ge
- -
2f.
E
o
.
n,
22.
n=195
n=195
.014.0
.0140
S
a
P.
L
.
S
S
.0L20
S
o
I
S
.0100
.0100
S
SI
S
S
o
S
"6t
o
a)
{J
I
d
Fr
,@80
..0O80
o
.
a
.E
,s
aa
o
s
o
t
o
c)
a
a
a
U)
o
s .0060
s
.0060
I
+t
I
.
{t
o
c
a
H
.0040
.0040
S
o
a
aa
a
a
S.
aa
t
I
a
al
S
a
.0020
a
S
I
P.
a
a
S
a
S
I
L
,0@o
o
o
I
o
a.a
Mav
May
Figure 55,
Figure
&ne
June
a
la
a.
a
S.
a
a
atata
a
5
I
.Iuly
July
.i
aaa
J
August
August
Sept.
Sept.
grooth rate
Ingtantaneous growth
rate in
tn length
length of
of juvenile
Instantaneous
fsll chinook
ehinook
Jrnrenile fall
tagged
recovered in
Ln Sixes
tagged and
and recovered
River estuary,
estuary, lt66
1966
Sfuceelillven
o
23.
4l'
flsh that
that were
fish
were out
more than
out nore
then 5
but less
less than
were u6ed.
used.
than 25
days, but
Aj days
daye lrere
5 days,
fhis
This
wae done
done to
to reduce
reduce handling
hendLing effects
was
effEcts shortly
afber tagging
to avoid
taggfng and
and to
}ong
shor{J.y after
avoLd long
o
periods uhere
good and
poor growth.
fish might
grorilth.
periods
where a
a fish
might experience
erperience good
end poor
tagged fish
fish waE
period.s.
averegod by
tagged
was averaged
by 10-day
lo-dey periods.
growth of
The
The growth
of
jnttlaL period
period in
in
During
the initial
Durfrg the
late
growth rate
earLy June,
late May
May and
was high,
and early
rltrne, the
the instantaneous growth
high,
rate in
in length
Length'was
o
g1
81
* 0.0080.
grocbh rate
O.0O8O. However,
Ibwever, the
the growth
Juneo
rate Loll
to aa low
in late
late June,
feIL to
lc'tr level
Lervelin
growth rate
0.0020. After
Afber late
Late June,
.hrne, the
the growth
increaeed.
rate again
agafui increased.
81 == 0.0020.
These
These data
data
suggest
that even
even thougb
though rnmall
m]l fish
to
euggest that
fiEh from
nay have
contrlbuted to
fron upstream
have contributed
upstrean may
o
gomeof
grcmrbh,those fish
independenu-y
estuarlT independently
some
reduced growth,
fish residing
reslding in
ln the estuary
of the reduced
growbh.
erperienced
experienced a period
period of
reduced growth.
of reduced
o
P.iepoL and
Pistol
Winchuck river
an{WlncJouek
rlver estuaries
egtuaries
prel,lninary studies
Pistol" and
the Pistol
and WLnchuck
In
May 1967
Winchuck
on the
196? preliminary
rere initiated
ireitiated on
In Uay
studj.es were
paraneters and
of juvenile
river
ineidence of
to measure
neasure environmental
and incidence
rlver estuaries
estuaries to
envl,rrrurental parameters
Juvenile
o
chlnook.
fall
fall. chinook.
coastal
conmonin
in south
south
These
These estuaries
closed systems
systens common
estuaries are typical
ttrpical closed
river
bars form
fora across
the river
across the
rivers
months when
rivers during
the summer
rtren sand
eend bars
duntng the
sr:mer uonths
the Sixes
Slces River
Rlver
to complement
cmplenent work
work on
on the
mouths.
T?restudies
strrdles were
were desigued
designed to
mout'hs. The
o
estuarXr'
estuary.
and
Rlver and
PistoL River
Juvenile
were sampled
Juvenile fail
tn the
the Pistol
faIL chinook
ehinook were
sanpled in
estuary
ln
estuary in
Jrne 1967e
May and
1967.
in Msy
and June
the Winchuck
May
Winchuck River
River and
and estr;sr1y
estuary in
1n the
L96? and
and in
W 1967
o
In
In
conpared
May 19
19 compared
mm on
ftsh ranged
frm 37
Lo 48
on lday
Pistol River,
Pistol
River, the
the stream
ranged from
sfrean fish
37 to
48 m
(f'fgure 6).
6).
l{a,y26
e6 (Figure
the estuary
on May
to
ot 39
bo 55
estuaqr on
to a
length range
mm in the
a length
range of
39 to
55 !!n
nm.
f,lsh 44
l+,lrmm.
estuary fish
fish 42
m and
and estuary
for
were stream
stresn fish
for the samples
samples were
42 mm
o
Means
Mesns
Juvenile
JuvenIle
a*ud47
ranged between
chinook sampled
Winchuck River
River on
May 15
15 ranged
between 37 and
mm
on May
the Wi"nchuck
4? m
sanpled in
ln the
(Figure 7).
with
of 42
w (Figure
rrith aa mean
meanof
7),
h2 mm
days
Chinook
in
the estuary
25 days
in the
eatuary 25
Chinook sampled
sa,np3-ed
m.
and5353inn.
at 4848and
rnaJormodes
nodesat
later had
rwtand
meanof
of 53
andmajor
had aa mean
Later
53 mm
Chetco niver
River
Adult
population estimates
in Jack
Jac.k Creek. Chetco
eetfurstes-h
A4q$ popul-ation
Creeks
chosen as
as aa
Chetco River,
Jack
River, rrlas
was chosen
tributary of
the lower
of, the
louer Chetco
Creek, a tributary
Jack Creek,
chinook by
of spawning
study
by
the abundance
spatnring chinook
to enumerate
enrurerate the
abundanceof
study stream
strean to
tagging
tagging
o
24.
24n
Pistol
Pistol River
River
o
5/19/67 n-67
n47
i/L9/67
30
Fistol R;j.ver
Pistol
River estuary
estua,ry
5/26/67 n=36
n-36
5/26/67
Fr
C'
o
H
a,
o
g . N20
o
t
3r-{
+t
tr
a,
o
C,
C)
a
l{
a,
810
A
/
o
'
C)
40
Figure
Figure 6.
6.
60
50
70
Fork
J.ength in
Fork length
in millimeters
niltimeters
Lerreih frequency
lbequency of
Length
faIL chinook
of juvenile
chinook in
ln
Jrnren{Le fail
the Pistol
PistoL River,
the
Blver, May
I{ery1967
1967
o
Rlver
______ Winchuck
WlnchuclcRiver
5/15/67
a437
5h5/6'l n=137
30
o
- -
Winchuck
River estuary
est
WinchuclcRiver
6/9/67
6/9/6? n=48
n*&8
F.,
()
tr
o
gn2O
a
k
tFl
+t
g
A
o
I
O
A
tr
o
F{
rl
It
Pl0
10
;l
o
IA
lIlt
tlr-r
tt \
1
I Il
il
f'
o'
0
Figr:re
Figure
7.
?.
-
o
:
40
r
_T'N
\--JtA'r--
60
60
50
Fork
in nitlLineters
millimeters
Fork leiigth
length ix
70
70
fa'l'l chinook
chlnook in
in
of juvenile
frequency of
Length frequency
Juvenile fall
the
Wirichuck niver,
River, Ifiay-Jr:ne
May-June 1967
1967
the-WinchuCk
.
o
25.
25.
p
catcasses.
carcasses.
AddltlonaL information
Additional
lnfonnetlon on
of, entry,
tlne of
enrtt?r age
composition, sex
m time
ege composition,
aex
ratioo, and
feasibility in
and feasibility
carcass€swas
ratios,
In using
taggedcarcasses
wasobtained
frm the
the study.
usilg tagged
study.
obtalnedfrcnz
o
peaks occur
I\m spawning
Two
spa,wningpeaks
occur in
Jack Creek.
Creek.
ln Jack
first .lrave
The first
wave appears
appears ln
in nldmidThe
November and
November
t'he second
and the
The early
early segment
lrt late
or early
ear\r January.
JanuarXr. ftre
second in
late December
Beggent,
Decemberor
l:r Jack
Jack Creek
poprrtation estimate
Creek ilBs
not sampled
the population
only to
to
in
was not
and the
esti-oate applies
sanpl€d and
applles only
S
o
the
the second
second spawning
spamjng escapement.
escapenent.
The
study area
area extended
cagcade"
The study
mouth upstream
upstream 3
miles to
ercbendedfrom
fron the
the nouth
to aa cascade.
3 nileE
FteLd work
began on
on December
work began
Field
Decehber20,
continued until
January 20,
L967,
L966, and
untjJ- January
20, 1967,
20, 1966,
and continued
o
when all
when
aLL fish
fish were
wers dead.
dead.
the stream
No carcasses
were found
during a
No
earcasses !{er€
fourrd in
in the
a
etream during
preUminarllr survey
prtor to
preliminary
Bunrey prior
to December
Decenber20.
20.
The carcasses
carcasses
The
S
o
trere
tSpes of
of, lri.rs"
were tagged
tagged ustng
using two different
different types
wire
was inserted
inser$ed around
was
the jaw,
tight, and
bent inside
the mouth
to
around the
twlsted tight,
and bent
lnside the
uouth to
Jaw, twisted
prwent
on brush.
bnrsh.
prevent snagging
snagging on
the
the
o
S
The
wire
Ttre rire
perlod.
spawning period.
spawrlng
taggad every
6vexy 37 to
to 44 days
Salmon
Sal:non were
during
were tagged
days during
and
carcasses var:ied
varied between
between 68S
6
snd
Recovery
Recovery of
tagged carcass6s
of tagged
100%,
LCf,#, averaging
averagfurg80%.
80S. AA total
carcasses was
tagged
total of
of 154
was tagged
1"54carcasses
in
ln
the
the study
area,
study area,
glving aa population
popuLation estimate
eonputed by
by aa formula
formrla
giving
estfunate of
chlnook when
whan computed
of 182
L82 chinook
o
(TaUle 13).
developed
developed by
by the
the BCF
BF Biometrics
Biometrl.og Unit
13).
Urdt (Table
fl
TabLe 13.
Table
13.
Sunmiary
of tag
tag and
and recovery
recovery data
data of
of chinook
Stmsry of
chinook
carcasses
River, 1966-67
cercesees in
in Jack
Chetco &tver,
L966*{7
Jack Creek,
Creek, Chetco
S
n
O
1
I
12/20
Lzln
12/23
L2/23
12/27
L2/27
t+
12/30
Lzha
4
5 t h 1 3 1/3
5
6
6 L / 6 3 1/6
1/10
rlLo
7
7
2
2
3
3
o
Totals
Totals
o
56
56
35
35
28
28
18
Lg
t&2 2
42
22
22
13
3
1
1
154
l.5l+
--
1 - -- * - -- --
2 7 2 2 ------ 27
2*- - -- -12
t2* - - 913*
1
L
42
I & 4 229h 1 5249 t +15
1
populatton =* 182
chlnook
Estimated
Esti-uated population
L82 chinook
91
3
9
4
3.
45
45
29
8
2J+
24
12
L2
10
m
80
83
83
85
85
1
I
68
68
77
77
100
lm
100
100
121+
124
80
80
3
3
o
26.
26.
Length and
and sex
sex data
d,ata were
were taken
taken from
Length
l-23 salmon.
fron 123
Tlre sex
saLoon, The
ccryosXtion
Eex composition
was 52%
ne.le
snaUor size
529u'
&Ia].eedominated
was
male and
and 48fl
48% fena,le.
female. Males
the e'mller
grrups and
dmtnated the
slze groups
the
and the
o
naJorlty
majority of
the largen
larger fLsh
fish r^rere
of the
were fecnales,
females.
Age compo8ition
composition of
Age
the run based
of the
based on
on scale
scel.e samples
fnoa 90
sanpl.es from
fish was
was as
as
9O fish
follows:
follows:
o
2-year
27ft1
2-year o1ds,
olds, 2;
3-year
18%;
oJ-ds,
lSf; 4-year
l+-year olds,
olds, 21%;
Zlfi; 5-year
3-yeatolds,
olds,
5*ear olds,
wd 6-year
6-year olds,
old,E, 1%.
33%;
If.
33%; and
Length-frequency data
d,ata did
did not
not indicate
indicate length
Length-frequency
length
gex ffiithin
differences by
by sex
differences
within the
the
o
jn
gror4)s, Apparent
age groups.
Apparent differences
differences did occur
occur in
the
cmpositlon by
sex composition
by age
gnoup, l4ales
the sex
age group.
dornirated ages
ages 22 and
and 3,
Males dominated
while females
fenal.es
3r whlle
groups 4i and
dmtnated
(fieure F).
s,ge groups
ard 55 (Figure
dominated age
e).
Pbysical and chemical characteristics of South Coast streams
o
A
study was
ruas designed
designed to
to measure
measure environmental
A study
emrironmental limits
ltrrdts in
ln Curry
Curry County
County
streans by
by nonitoring
general spectrum
the general
streams
monitoring the
water
spectnm of
of flows,
fJ.ows, temperatures,
teryeratures, uater
chenrtstr-y, and
8nd weather.
rarcather.
chemistry,
o
The
(f) flonrg
The infonnation
information collected
collected iac].uded
included (1)
in
flows in
rrtr'ortarrt
(e) lrcelqly
river systems;
systenrs; (2)
(3) weekfy
important river
weekly air
weekly
air and
tenperature; (3)
and water temperature;
turbidlty measurements;
(4) correlation
neesulenents; (4)
correlation of
turbidity
of stream
strean data with
with U. S. Weather
Weather
gouth coastal
Bureau
flon south
data from
coastal stations;
Bureau data
(5) description
description of
stations; arid
ana (5)
of cliinatological,
climatol"ogical.,
a
geologlcal, and
botanical characteristics
sxld botanical
eharacteristics in
geological,
in Curry
C\ury County.
County.
The stream
The
strean systems
systems
nonitored from
from north
monitored
north to
to south
south were
rrere Sixes
Sixee River,
River, Elk
S[k River,
River, Brush
Brush Creek,
Creek,
Euchre Creek,
gers Creek,
creek, Hunter
lfunter Creek,
creek, Myers
creek, Pistol
Euchre
PlstoL River,
R:[ver, Chetco
chetco River,
and
River, and
o
Wlnchuck
Winchuck River.
River.
colJected durtng
Data
Data collected
during the
the fiscal
year are
flscal- year
file in
the Brookings
a,re on
on file
in the
Brooklngs
Laboratory
and will
u{LL be
be summarized
Laboratory and
sununarizedin
i.rr succeeding
reports.
succeeding reports.
o
tlatchery
Hatchery Site
Site EVal.uation
Evaluation
The recent
recent success
success of
of the
the coho
The
coho hatcheries
hatcherj.es has
has stinulated
interest
stLmrlated an
a,ninterest
o
1n finding
finding new
nerr locations
in
locatlons for
for hatcheries
hatcheries on
on coastal
coastal rivers.
rivers.
punping rrater
of pumping
to the
the hatchery also
of
water to
also allowed
a'llolred us
us to
to investigate
investlgate coastal
coastal lakes
1akes
as
hatcherXrrator
as potenti.al
potential hatchery
water sources.
sources.
t
[1
fire acceptance
The
accepta6ce
n.
o
27.
flo
a
o
o
0
Fr
o
g
H30
e
o
0
.l
+t
c
$n
S.l
E)
Ai
'C
o
fotal
o
a
o
Figure 8.
Figu
age
ae
chinook ln
fall ChiflQOk
Age and sex composjt±0
eonposition Ooffali
bi
Age
Jack Creek,
Creelc,Chetc0
Biver, 1966..67
L96647
ChetcoRiver,
Jack
o
29.
potentta] hatchery
Criteria
to judge
usd to
Criteria used
hatchery water
water supplies
tncl.ud€d
zupplteo inc:Luded
Judge potential
(f)
(Z) ^a naxinun
(1) a
a eird-lnrgr
minimum etrean
stream floa
flaw of
of U
17 cfs,
maximum rnater
water tenperature
temperature of
of
cfs, (2)
o
(:) aa ininiiaim
65 F,
F, (3)
ntnLmm ofof3 3acres
65
acresof,
of l€nd,
land, (ln)
(4) road
road and
and eLectric
electric poffer
power available,
avalLable,
(5) paseage
(6) potentis.l
(5)
passage for
for JurrenflLeo
juveniles snd
and adults,
adults, a,rd,
and (6)
potential dteease
disease problems.
problems.
Ed.stlng
Fish Commission,
ComuiesLonn
Cran€
Comttseion, arid
Existing Fish
Game
Commission,
U. S.
S. Creologica.l
Geological Srrrrrey
Survey records
and U.
a
were
sea,rchedto
to locate
locate streams
were searched
etreamE having
the necessary
halring the
necegsary flow
floa and
terperature
and temperature
regimes.
regimes.
Sintl"ar
were used
Similar sources
sourceEwere
ugedfor
for data
onthe
coaEtal lakes0
data on
the ]iinnology
Li-mrology of
of coastal
f.alcesn
A
list was
devel-opedincluding
A list
was developed
flve lakes
to
fucluding 17
str€ams and
J-alcesappearing to
L7 streams
and five
o
pronise.
have promise.
have
The
flsrca and
naxi.mn ternperatrrres
The ninlmu
minimum flows
temperatures obeeffied
observed in
in 16
ard maxbzuim
L5
of the
the streams
of
strsams are
are listed
Listed in
tn Table
Tabl.e14.
14.
physlcal
Based upon
the available
Based
upon the
avaiJable physical
datar
South Fork frask
data, the
the South
River, Kilohis,
lbask R;[von,
Nestucca rivers
were
KiJ-chis, Yachats,
Iachato, and
rlvere were
and Nestucca
o
pronising water
the most
judged
as the
nost promising
uater sources.
sourc€oo
Judged as
Infonnatton compiled
coryiJ.ed on
on the
the five
flve lakes
becane the
Information
la^los became
the subject
of an
unsubJect of
an untf0oastal, Lakes
pub3.ishedreport,
rePorbr "Coastal
PossibLe Water
Lekes as
published
es Possible
Sources for
for aa Coho
Coho
Water Sources
o
lbtcheryrtt
Hatchery," by
G. Skeesick.
by D.
D. G.
$keesick.
The
were that
lakes
The conclusions
that among
five Lakes
concluslons were
arcng the five
15).
15).
(taUfe
there ffere
potentiaf (Table
valry:i.ngdegrees
there
were varying
degrees of potential
l6neeJ. Lake
However,
HoilEver, Nunsel
Lake
satisfJ"ed
satisfied nore
more requirernente
requirements compared
coryared to
to the
the other
lakes anal3zed.
analyzed.
other Lakes
o
AEa aresult
A
result of
the investigation,
of the
investLgation, aa more
on hydrography
hyilrography
more detailed
detaged study
study on
and limnology
of coastal
coastaL streams
the auspices
and
was started
l"irmologr of
lakes was
rurder the
streans and
a.rd lakes
starbed under
auspLces
(Pt 89-304)
of the
the Anadronous
cLose of
of
Anadromous Fish
Fish Act (FL
year.
89-30&) at
the close
of the
the fiscal
fiEcal f€€trr
at the
0
o
CohoLiberations
Surplus Coho
Liberations
to the
the
of surplus
coho at
our coastal
The
led to
ftre advent of
coasta-l hatcheries
hatcherles Led
zurplue adult
adult coho
at our
o
practice of
practice
of hauling
hauling live
Live adults
to other
other streams.
adults to
$treane.
effort with
areas
ar€as stocked
transporting the fish
flsh is
the Oregon
is aa joint
with the
Oregon
stocked and
snd transporting
Joint effort
Gane Commission.
Game
CounL$sion.
o
of the
The
seJ.ectim of
the
ltre selection
The
The fish
usually released
barriers in
locations
fish are usually
released above
ln locations
above barrd.ers
J-acking
lacking natural
tnrcks at
natrraL runs
nme of
of salmon.
ssf,$on. The
on trucks
equal
loaded on
at an
The fish
fieh are
are Loaded
an equal
sex ratio
contain approd.rnately
ratio artd
and contain
approximately 200
per Load.
load.
200 fish
fieh per
In
we released
In 1966,
L966, we
reLeased
o
o
E
Ei
v
+r
6
rl
a
H
0)
F{
+J
.H
g
H
H
g
-$
rl
o
.rlr.{.C
.rl
E
8s
'd€ 8f;
HC
(lt
o.C
dF{.-l
A
+)
z,z
A
O
O
O
rl
*ddE
*
5tr€
HE-i88.0.6 €€ 1€df:.
oFt
rl
6
=t4BE-{
.r{ rrl
c
€g€€.9,9
o
*h
Fr t{
o0)
h"o
t.q
.o .tt
rl
-o
c0
o
H
S!
Fr
r8
O F{
tll .o.a
fq +)
.q'Jc)
+t+t O
atn
t4lFl
cHJd
xF roJ td F h
Fl
.r{
E
I $'o 3
H
0)
6
c)
a
p
+)
m
( 0 2 a)
o
o
oc
3 fid
FIED
FIO
+tEl
20
14
21
32.9
Y
i,{.}-'\h'd
ssss*s
9/12/63
8/13/64
9/15/64
1964
22.6
70
15.9
17.6
rr\
dFl
.cql
HrA
71
69 J
61
69
65
61
63
61
62
h
q
tt
Ee8€9,3s 8.;r.F#FeSt
ooootU)0
i,s;
p
88
BoBr.eE, t3$.:H$rgE E
F
t--6€EEs€g
';'+d>>J€{ d8{g>448d9
o
b
.d
tr
.6
H
E
ol
+at
8.fl #
f']
oE!
u\
-*
O
F{
38:333fE
H?€Heft*3*
$r
g
S
g
o
Sl
A
-it
i
.
5
dO
E
[r
o
8
Fd
i|g
FI
H
..
NOTE:
o *$dS
9/9/63
7/9/5
sR SSSSR$d S
20
65
g 9q
15.0
68
65
42.0
30.0
63
61
64
70
68
65 F
te.
Max.
obs.
Fq
fi HH
F 9t s
.rl
!
\osE
I die
,i Ett
OFC
OGC
OGC
OGC
OGC
0CC
OGC
0CC
OGC
OFC
USGS
0CC
USGS
OGC
OGC
OGC
0CC
OGC
Source
of data
ct ct c! N r{ onot r-{ c{ c\
3
2
1
3
2
1
2
2
2
2
1
27
3
3
33
2
2
2
Years
of
data
F't g
oo
t5Fo
(J *)
.08
'gH
" c 6t'{
{J
CI
'cd
'15 (u
Fl
9E
TQ
OCJ
.0(D
gI)
5{Fl
o
o.c
g
^ql
CJ a)
(5{J
O ell
-q
g4r
.d
.r{
tr
oo
0)
o
o
o
.Fl
E
d
oo
Stream flows In Elk River and those by the Game Commission (0CC) were measured with a Gurley
current meter, Other Fish Commission measurements are estimates. The USGS measurements
were
recorded at permanent gauging stations.
/ Recorded on July 6, 1964, wtien the flow was 45 cf a.
10/15/52
F{
0.2 ml. above mouth
Camp 101 (3 ml. above Hobo)
At mouth (Hebo)
At Fall Cr.
1/4 ml, abv. Hwy. 101 bridge
Just below Slick Rock Cr.
Just below Reedy Cr.
Confluence of West Fork
0.7 ml. above the mouth
Just above Anvil Cr.
3
oo
NOt
rrn
\n v\
{{
10/15/52
26.7
45.0
13.4
15.8
25.0
16.5
flow
cfs
sssseH$e
8888888888
q)(J()q)c)c)c)c)()c)
Elk
o
ctaoraao
Indian
{J
(fl \n tf\\O \O tn (\l O
(n
Fl F{ (ll F{ Ol -:t-t
Ol Cr\
Yachats
Siuslaw
o
g
+eolr\c--ooo
\ o \ o \ o \ or{ \ of{\ ooI.\
\ o \ c jF{\ o O\ rF{
l.
Little Nestucca
Salmon
.f)
d
F{
v\6 0 (\ r.t -+to r
\C, \O t\\O \O \O \O \O
Three Rivers
F
d
c
cd
Date
s)
(u
1d
South Fork
East Fork of
South Fork
l{
:t
Sa3inonberry
o
t)
o
n
,.o
o
1.0 ml. above Williamson Cr,
Just above Gods Valley Cr.
0.1 ml. above mouth
1/4 ml. above Moss Cr.
1/4 ml. below Napes Cr.
6-1/4 ml. east of Tilamook
Just above Gold Cr.
At mouth
o
rd
o
North Fork
d
Mm.
g
.r'l
a
or N ct crrcl$kFf
Nestucca
o
tr
o
to
Wilson
Thask
o
tJ
Location
o
d
o
()
O
Miami
Kilohis
o
H
o
o
Necanicum
Nehalem
O
streams
ql
Tributary
d
*
recorded in coastal
S
o
River
system
o
temperatures
S
o
Minimum stream flows and maximum
S
a
Table 14.
S
S
"9
S
o
29.
C) 4J
L5 l.t
=t
Oin
4 .rt
o o.r{d
O.r{.rl
O 0l{J
{rElo
tl6oo
S
E
Tl
OF{O
t.t{C)
+J5O
(ook
JJ
c(J c
.rl
cd
-e80
F{OC
x-g E
t{ *J
d8 E
o0)
c'EA
fr 6E
Lake
t1
q)
+1
tt
a
o
o
o
g
o
Fr
tr
o
g
.c
()
u0
o
Fl
g
.r{
l{l
g
rr{
q{
o
trr
EI
H
a
c
r
rl
c)
Fl
.o
o
o
O
cd
F{
d
H
d
€
CJ
Fl
36
g
moo
r-l
r{
E(Dlrrdf{
ollooo
9Xooo
f=]
goomgr
.rtFlmoul
90qooo
F{q{()o(J
d
o)
A)
.rl
H
q,
Flll,d
&
H
F.Fr
EE.S
F9#d
sgd
fidr$
g d, f,
Ho.rl
sgs
Moderate
o
No
b0
.5
rlo)
Hd d
,gd
ts
UnJcno'wn
Unlcncnqn
Probable
Difficult
Difficult
Unimown
Uniciown
Unknown
Disease
problems
E$EFE
Difficult
BE
ooi)
No
Close
h. AHH
a.# fr tH
Easy
Easy
{J+)+)
+
tr
A{
(J
p{
tr
Poor
Some hauling
desirable
High
E
>r
Close
owoo
Good
d
Exces8
o
0)
g)O
Easy
E
Moderate
hho-qo
Yes
tE.g.g
Yes
s; h h s'H €
8.5 g 'g 8s S
Very easy
F{
Very low
'€
df{
frt
.-co
Yes
s{
o
o
m
Some hauling desirable
rlrl$O
Poor
c)
rl
Very low
Development of
adult handling
r$
Excess
o
G
Yes
d
(D
+)
c
o
Excellent
Release of
smolts
0)
F
Close
Turbidity
(!)
No
Power
access
R
o
Sufficient
o
o
v,
t{
o
+>
o
(6
-t
o
Good
H
c
€)
Nargina].
€
o
t{
o
Road access to
hatchery site
H
.d
+)
sd
c)
Hatchery
location
+)
d
,g
temp.
.r{
${
Water of
adequate
o
c
o
Excess
o
{J
s
Loon
a
fr{
&
o
Triangle
o
g
Floras
o
I{
.rl
F
Munsel
a
o
o
J4
o
o
(0
o
a
Clear
(d
r{
Summary of factors considered in locating a coho hatchery on five western Oregon lakes
o
Table 15.
0
.
o
30.
d
a
o)
o
€
8
o
.31.
32..
(TabLe16).
into 13
eoastal watersheds
&1573
adults into
13 coastal
waterehed,s(Table
16).
11,573 adults
equsl
Aesuning an
an eqyal
Assuming
seor
sex ratio
ratio €nd
and 31000
3,000 egg6
eggs per
per f1m{er
female, the
the potentral
potential egg
egg depositlon
deposition uas
was
o
various other
other
?r?frzrkOf fry
roenestocked
into various
fry were
stocled into
An
AD additional
additional 2,202,100
1?r35Lr000.
17,361,000.
lakes and
the spring
of, 1967.
and streams
sbreans in
lrl the
1967.
sprlng of
lakes
Table 16.
16.
Table
a
coho
lfider
of adult
hatchery coho
Number
of
brood hatchery
adult 1966 br"ood
coasta.l streams
Liberated into
streans
into coastal
liberated
Str-pan system
systern
Stream
o
M4mi
Itieei
Kilchte
Kilchis
Wilson
Wilson
Trask
Thask
Nestucca
Nestucca
Selmon
Salmon
o
W
Strewn
system
svst€rn
Number
liberated
_Iiberated
zLZ
212
IrOO
400
SiJ-eta
Siletz
laqtr5na
Yaqumna
350
350
tPO
400
600
600
400
4O0
A1sea
Alsea
Siuslaw
Siuelaw
2J&tt
2,404
305
345
L1262
1,262
2rgL'
2,915
L1575
1,575
Umpga
Umpqua
Coq'rilte
Coquille
Rogue
Rogue
TotaL
Total
o
Nuinbez'
liberated
liberated
350
3W
400
400
&0573
11,573
barren
them in
ln barren
practice of
reLeesing them
ard releasing
of hauling
harrling adults
adults and
Because
the practice
Because the
erraLuate its
itg success.
su.cc€ssr
to evaluate
streams
was neff,
new, it
it les
was necessary
necessary to
etrea,ns uag
the nost
The
most pneoelng
pressing
(e) OiA
(f) Did
queetbns
the planting
site? ana
frou the
questi.ns wene
were (1)
Did the
the adults
adults uove
move from
planting site?
and (2)
Did
o
they
they reproduce
reproduce successfully?
successfuLly?
on Bear,
evaluate the
the novement
movement patterns,
patterns, surveys
made on
Bear, Suchre,
Euchre,
To evaluate
surrreys were nnade
the
becane of
of, the
what became
to see
creeks to
eee what
North
Scbaan, and
North Fork Schooner,
and Lobster
Lobster creeks
Schooner, Eckman,
o
flsh.
fish.
5h,68,
to observe
obsenre 64,
were able
te were
able to
Twentyfour
68,
hours after
afber release,
telease, we
I\renty-forr hours
creekal
l{orth Fork
Fork Schooner
Sehooner creeks,
Euchre, Bear,
and North
the releases
Bear, and
and 71%
of, the
roleeses in
ln Euchre,
7lS of
respectively.
o
respectively0
be
could not
The
and Lobster
Lobster creeks
creeks could
not be
releases into
into Eckinan
EctrEranend
Ttre releases
of reasons.
r€asons.
followed
closely for
for a variety
followed as closely
variety of
(laUte 17).
conditions (Table
1?).
to flow
flow conditions
definitely related
novement was
was defjnitely
related to
Fish movement
they spread
flows, they
spread
trj.gh flows,
moderate to
to high
When
Whenthe
released during
the fish
r'rere released
durLng moderate
fieh were
o
througlrout the
the available
throughout
avaiJ.able stream
4r€4.
streen area.
fLous
flows moved
moved rnrch
much shorter
distances.
shorber distanees,
o
3.ovr
released during
Fish that
during low
that were released
Flsh
to be just
Downstream
movement appeared to
Downstrean moveraent'
Just
o
32.
3?,
'V
to the
the nearest
rrnoccupid. spaiming
nearest unoccupied
to
spelrdng riffle.
rlffle.
Nearly
the effective
effective
Near1yall
of the
aLLof'
movementoccurred
occuned in
in the
the first
flrst 24
movement
hours after
release.
2/ahours
afber release.
o
per cent
cent
Fifty-three
Fifby-three per
of
of the
the ferua,Les
females released
released in
ln Bear
Bear Creek
in North Fork
Creek and
60S of
of those
t'hose in
and 60%
Schooner
Creek were
obsenred digging
the day
release.
Schooner Creek
were observed
redds the
day after
after release.
digglng redds
Since
$lnce
one of
of, the
the benefits
one
benefits of
of hauling
t,o use
ar'eas
hauLing adults
is to
use all
sLL available
strean areas
available stream
adults is
o
r
the
above the
rslease the
above
the release
we concluded
very important
to release
release sites,
sites, we
eoncluded it
it is
is very
i"nryorLantto
perlods of
adulte during
f1ow.
adults
moderate to
during periods
of moderate
to high
high flow.
o
Table 17.
Table
1?.
coestal
coho in
in coastal
Movement
Movenent of
of transplanted
traneplanted adult
adul-t coho
streams,
brood
streans, 1966
1966 brood
,verage
o
o
Stream
$!feelg_-_
flLow
Flow
Eckman
Eclman
Euchre
Euchre
Lower
Lo*er
Upper
Upper
N. I'k"
Fk. Schooner
Schooner
Bear
Bear
Low
Low
0.1
o.1
Low-Mod.
tow-Mod.
Low-Mod.
tow-'Mod"
Moth-High
Mod.-Hlgh
0.2
0
"2
0.0
0
.0
0.0
0
"0
tr{od.-ttigh
Mod.-H].gh
doianstream
dorynstteaq
upqtr9an
, upstream
upstream
- upstr.+n
0,3
O'3
0.04
o.o4
0.3
O
"3
o.@
0.09
1.85
1"85
1.30
1"30
0.91
0.91
0.16 & 0.17
0.4&o,9v
0.4 & 0.9 / 0.16&o.u
0.0
o.0
0.74
o.7h
yJ Two
by aa barrier.
release sites
barrier.
Ibo release
sites separated
separated by
o
progeny from
calried
transported adults
fias carried
Detailed
of, the
the progeny
fron transported
adults was
Deta:iJ"ed sampling
sanpling of
fry were observed
obsenred
The
fry
first
The first
on in
in Bear Creek,
tributary of
River.
Creek, a tr5-butarT
of Yaquina River.
nm.
February
had aa mean
mea:r length
length of
of 37.7
Febrrrary 13,
and had
L3, 1967,
L967, and
37.7 mm.
o
o
S
y June
30, they
June J0,
they had
By
in
than wild
wiJd juveniles
attained
of 63.4
waa larger
Larger than
attalaed aa mean
mean length
length of
63.4 mm
rnmwhich was
Juveniles in
two of
of three
three nearby streams.
streans.
ft.
Two population
population estimates
400 ft
t\oo
estimates covering
covering 4OO
made in
in August 1967.
L967"
nade
ft.
and
and 500
500 ft
of
of, stream
stream were
juvenile
one juvenile
At that
tJne, there
there was
lras approximately
that time,
approxinately one
per linear
per
foot of
of stream.
llnear foot
strean.
between
of, stream
Since
was U,
600 feet
feet of
strean between
Since there
there r.ras
ILT6OO
fernal sg
that 98
ca.n assume
assume that
the
w€ can
bamier and
of spawning,
spamingr we
the barrier
the upper limit
Llnit of
98 females
and the
juvenlles.
produced 11,600
produced
11r5OOjuveniles.
o
33.
3)"
.a
1|'
I
growth and
The excellent
excellent growth
The
moderate numbers
only noderate
and only
numbersof
of juveniles
indicate
Jweniles indicate
that
Creek probabiy
receive an
that Bear
Bear Creek
probably did
adults.
corylement, of
&td not receive
an adequate
of adults"
adeqrrate complement
o
Miscellaneous Activities
Miscellaneous
Activities
Herring fiqheries
fisheries
HerelnF
.
o
Conmercia-l herring
bait fisheries
hemtng bait
Commercial
fiEheries exist
exlst in
in several
the coast.
coast.
severa.l bays along
along the
'lnnorte,rrt fishery
(Wjnchester Bay) on
The most important
fishery is
The
is located
located in
1n Salmon
$almon Harbor
tlarbor (Winchester
the Umpqua
the
tlupqra River.
Biver,
o
Other
Other nirror
minor fisheries
fisheries
exist
the Yaquina
Alsea bays.
bays.
exlst in
in the
laquina and
and Alsea
paet 5-6
years
The seine
fishery in
The
sei:re fishery
in Salmon
$aLnon Harbor
llarbor has
has developed
the past
developed during
during the
t-5 years
provides bait
balt for
and provides
sport and
charter boats
boats fishing
fishjng out
the Umpqua
Unpqua giver.
River,
for sport
of the
and charter
ort of
Herring are
por.ts.
also exported
Herring
are also
to other
other coastal
oported to
coasta.l ports.
o
past years,
years, the
In past
the herring
In
moved
herring ordinarily
ord5narily
norred into
into Salmon
Salmon Harbor
llarbor in
in March
or
or April
April and spawned
the r^ocky
rocky shores
piling in
the besln.
basin.
spamned on the
in the
shores and piJ.ing
The
The fish
fish
generally present
present until
were generally
flshenren"
were
untiJ- about
0ctober according
to local
Local fishermen.
about October
according to
o
During the
the spring
During
of 1967,
L967, the
the herring
the bay
bay ihich
wtrich created
created
spring of
not enter
herring did
dld not
enter the
hardship on
on the
a hardship
the brrit
bait dealers
dealers and other
flshi.rrg interests.
interests.
other sport
sport fishing
The Fish
Fish
The
Comulssion and other
other agencies
Commission
the
and
agencies were asked to
to investigate
investigate
the situation
and
situation
o
take remedial
remedial action
take
if necessary.
neceEsary,
actlon if
A
A variety
variety of
reasons were
roere offered
offered by local
local
of reasons
interests;
to be assoeiated
interests; however,
however, the
the difference
difference in
behavior appeared to
associated rrith
with
in behavior
envirornrcntal factors
environmental
factors in
the Umpqua
ilupgua estuary.
ln the
estuarp..
o
Large
Iarge numbers
of herring
herrjng were
lrere
rnrmbers of
prevented
posslbLy prevented
located
b5r fishermen
fishemen in
located by
in the
the lower
rlver and
lorer river
they were possibly
and they
from movlng
upstrean and into
from
moving upstream
river
lnto Salmon
Sa}non Harbor
lhrbor by fresh
f,resh water
water or
or low
lon river
tenperature.
temperature.
o
A
themograph was
A thermograph
was installed
tenperature in
in Salmon
Salnon
inetalled to
to monitor
nonltor temperature
progaxl raas
tlarbor and
periodlc salinities.
Harbor
was initiated
to
and. a program
initiated
to take
take periodic
sa.linities.
When
flrst'
lihen first
28, 1967,
bay was
the
sampled
saqled on June 2,
L967, salinity
the bay
and the
in the
was 25.5
2J.5 0/00
sa-linity in
o/oo and
temperature
tenperature 59
F.
59 F.
the summer.
the
$umer.
Similar
SinlLar data
data wlljl
will be collected
collected durJng
during the
the remainder
renajnder of
of,
.
o
34.
3l+.
.'
iF '
-
Unpqug,
TJmpqua River.
River Enelt
smelt fisherT
fishery
(Ihgfe&bth;g pacl€icps)
gll-L nets
t\m drift
Two
drift gill
nets were
were fished
fished for
for smelt
pacificus)
melt (Thaleichthys
o
jn the
the tJmpqua
llnpqua River
in
River froan
from Late
late Decenber
December L966
1966 to
Lo mid-March
uid-l4areh 1967.
L96?.
Approximately
Approxi:nately
pounds of
of smelt
r.rere landed
comnerci"a"l fishermen
4,000-5,000
4rOO0-5r0O0 pounds
emelt were
landed by the
the two
tllo commercial
fishelmoen
duning
during 31
fishing.
of fishing.
Jl days of
a
tides
tides at
at slack
sl-ack water.
water.
generally nore
Smelt
were generally
more abundant
Sme1t w€re
high
abundant during
during high
the
The fishing
fishing area
area extended
extended from
from the
the Highway
bridge
ltlghnay 101 brldge
at
Reedsport
at Reed
sport upstrea,n
upstream about
about lp
4 ml].ss.
miles.
green sturgeon
Both wtrite
white and
and green
sturgeon were
a problen
problem r&ile
while netting
netting in
lower river.
river.
ln the
the l,ower
o
taken in
the sport
Smelt
$nelt were taken
in the
sport
fishery
to Scottsburg
$cottsburg at
fishery up to
the head
head of
of tidewater.
tidewater.
at the
OxbowBurn,
Burn. Siusla.w
Oxbow
Smith rivers
Siuslav arid
a.rrd fuilhjriverF
o
0n Augu.st
August 20,1966,
On
20, 1966, aa flre
fire started
started on
on Oribow
Oxbow Creek,
Creek, aa tributary
tributary of,
of the
the
Siuslaw
Siuslaw River.
Rtvero
The
control the
The fire
fire burned out
out of
of control
the nexb
next several
days,
severaL days,
spreading over
over the
the ridge
ridge in
spreading
ln a southwesterly
direction into
the Smith
Smith R:iver
River
directlon
into the
southwester\r
o
drainage.
drainage"
Ttre
The fire
fire burned
burned E
a rougtrLy
roughly circular
area encompass5ng
encompassing about
about /+610@
46,000
clrcular area
acres owned
BtM and International
acres
Paper Company.
owned by BLM
laternationaL
Corq>any. On
the main
nain stein
of
0n the
sten of
.$nith River,
Rlver, the
the maJor
Smith
major damage
was suatained
Tnin Sisters
&lard
da,nage r.ras
slrstained between Twin
Sisters Guard
o
Station
Pl,ace, a distance
ard Damewoods
Da,neuoodsPlace,
Station and
miles.
of 10
distance of
LO rniles.
Watersheds of
Scare,
of Scare,
Watersheds
Beaver,
Beaver, South
Marsh creeks
creeks lrere
were coupletely
completely burned.
burned.
South Sister,
Sister, Devil's
CIub, arid
Devil-rs Club,
arrd Marsh
partialty
burned included
Streams partially
burned
included Vincent,
Big, Blind,
Vincent, North
North Sister,
Hlind, and
and
$ister, Big,
o
YeILow creeks.
Yellow
ereeks.
portions of
the Siuslaw,
On
On the
Siuslaw, portions
O:rbow,Bear,
Bearl :Eemorid,
and l{aight
Haight
of Oxbow,
Emorrd, snd
ereeks were burned.
burned.
creeks
Representatives of
Representatives
of industry,
fuidustry, BLM,
Bweau of
of Sport
B[,U, OGC,
$port Fisheries
Fisheries
OGC' Bureau
o
and WLLdliJe,
the Fish
and
Wildlife, and
Fish Commission
Corrsrtssion met
met on
on several
oecasi.ons to
to discuss
diecuss
and the
several occasions
remedial measures
remedial
&easures for
for safeguarding
the fisheries
fisheries resource.
r€sourcor
sefeguerrding the
International
TnternationaL
portions of
burn with
BLM decided
the burn
with EndrinEndrinPaper Company
Corparry and BLM
decided to
to reseed
reseed portions
of the
o
coated
coated DoWIas
Douglas fir
flr seed.
seed.
prev:ious studies
had shown
that Endrin
&rdrin is
is
Since
Slnce previous
studies had
ehown that
e:<brenely toxic
the
extremely
organisms,
to:d.c to
to aquatic
organims, it
to monitor
nonitor the
aqetic
it was
was decided
decided to
reseeding operation.
reseeding
operation.
Br:reau of
Fiehenies
Under sponsorship
of the
the Bureau
of Sport
Sport Fisheries
slnnsorship of
o
35'
35"
QF}
and Wildlife.
and
Wlld3'ife.
the Charleston
Staff
personnel from
Research Laboratory
Laboratory
Staff pereonnel
f?on the
Charleeton Reeeareh
partieipeted
planning the
portions of
the field
participated
in
in planning
the study
camied out
out portions
of the
field
study and
and carried
o
work.
0n December
December 22,
22, 1966,
L966, liveboxes
On
llveboxes containing
contai:ring juvenile
coho from
from the
the
Jwenite coho
Alsea
Al sea River
River Hatchery
Hatchery were
were placed
placed in
in Selth
Smith River
River aa short
short d.istance
distance above the
the
o
West Fork
Fork and
West
and in
fut South
South Sister
Sister Creek.
Creek.
periodlcally
These liveboxes
These
liveboxes were
lrere periodically
sanpled in
conJr:nction with
sampled
in conjunction
with other
other livebo:ces
liveboxes stationed
the drainage
etationed in
ln the
dra:jnage by
cooperating agencies,
cooperating
agencies.
o
The
The livebox
livebox in
Sister Creek was
was Lost,
lost parb
part way
way
in South Sister
progran but
through
the program
but the
the livebox
through the
llvebox in
i:r Smith
Snith River
ILLver was
lras successfully
held
successfuJJ;y held
progran. terminated
untll
until the
in
terainated
the program
JarruarSr. Sanples
Samples of
of coho salmon
were
in January.
sal:non were
periodically
renoved from
the liveboxes
periodically removed
to
flon the
liveboxes and transferred
transferred
to the
the Bureau of
of
o
Sport
Sport Fisheries
Fisheries and
Wildlife for
btoassay.
for bioassay.
and WiJ.dli.fe
of these
these and
Analysis
other
Anal.ysls of
and other
parts of
in other
other parts
salmonids
DDE
salnonids held
held in
the drainage
of DDT
of the
shored traces
traces of
DDT and DDE
drainage showed
(Morton, L967)o
their tissues,
tissues, but
in
but no edrin
Endrin (Morton,
1967).
fu their
o
in one
one sample
of redsi4sd
in
redsided shjners
shiners colLected
collected fron
from Blg
Big Creek
Creek and
and fbom
from five
five
sa,nple of
picked up
dead. crayfish
crayflsh picked
dead
up in
in Big Creek.
Creek.
o
o
a
o
o
Endrin was
was detected
detected
However, &rdrin
.
36.
36.
LITERATURE CIThD
TIMNATUNE
CIIED
o
o
.
o
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
r
L.
Morton,
Morton, WiILiam
William H.
M. 1967.
L967. Effects
Effeets of
distribution of
of &rdrjn-coated
Endrincoated
of aerial
aerial distributj.on
DougJ"as-fir
onthe
the aquatic
coastaL stream.
Douglasfir seeds
seedeon
of an
an Oregon
0regoncoastal
aqratie life
life of
strean"
Special
Seport, Bur,
Bur. of
of Sport
Special Report,
Fish. &
& tr{lLdl.,
Wildi., Port1and,
Portland, Oreg.,
13 pp,
pp.
Sport Figh.
0reg.e 13