·McKENZIE SUBBASIN Fish Management Plan
( ;
Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife
Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 1 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 (Mildred Thooison/ oavid Rodriguez)
Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 2 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan
Prepared by Phi 1i p Howell James Hutchison Robert Hooton Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife
and
Gregg Ackerman Izaak Walton League Bob Bunstead McKenzie Flyfishers Joe Ferguson Northwest Steelheaders Ken He 1fri ch McKenzie River Guides Assn. Dan Mulholland At-large representative Citizens Advisory Committee
Apri 1 1988
Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 3 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ...... 1 Organization ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 1 Genera 1 Gui de 1i nes ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 2 IMPLEMENTATION •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 3 HABITAT ••••••••••.••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 8 Background and Status ...... 8 Guidelines ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 25 Objectives ...... 25
RESIDENT TROUT ...... 33 Background and Status ...... 33 Guidelines ...... 47 Objectives ...... 48
SUMMER STEELHEAD ...... 53 Background and Status ...... 53 Guidelines ...... 58 Objectives ...... 58
WINTER STEEL HEAD ...... 63 Background and Status ...... 63 Guidelines ...... 64 Objectives ...... 64
SPRING CH I NOOK ...... 66 Background and Status ...... 66 Gui de 1i nes ...... 79 Objectives • ...... " " ...... " ...... 79 FALL CHINOOK ...... 84 Background and Status ...... 84 Guidelines ...... _...... 85 Objectives ...... 85
COHO ...... 86 Background and Status ...... 86 Guidelines ...... 86 ...... 86 MOUNTAIN WHITEFISH ...... 87 Background and Status ...... , • ., ...... 87 Objectives ...... , •• ., ...... 88
MISCELLANEOUS SPECIES ...... 89 Background and Status ...... , ...... 89 Objectives ...... 89
Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 4 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 CONTENTS (continued) \
ANGLING ACCESS ...... "...... 90 Background and Status ...... ; ••·••••• 90 .Guidelines...... 91 Objectives ...... ~ ...... 91 REFERENCES ••••• o...... 95
Appendix 1. Fi sh species occurring in the McKenzie subbas.i n...... 99
. Appendix 2. McKenzie River angler opinion survey ...... 100 Appendix 3. Oregon Administrative Rules for fish management of the McK.enzie Subbasin ...... 107
)
Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 5 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The McKenzie Plan was produced by a collaborative effort of many people. Other ODFW staff who contributed include Max Smith, Jim Lichatowich, Nancy MacHugh, Dick Irish, Jim Griggs, Tom Nickelson, Jeff Zakel, and Jim Greer. Members of the group working on habitat issues were Jim Shumway, Department of Forestry; Del Skeesick, Randy Dunbar, and Steve Eubanks, U.S. Forest Service; Neil Armantrout, Lee Lauritzen, Bureau of Land Management; Jim Rombach, Sue Bowers, Weyerhaeuser Corp.; Steve Akehurst, Rosboro Lumber Co., Dale Hagey, Eugene Water and Electric Board; Stan Gregory, o.s.u. Department of Fisheries and Wildlife; Kent Howe, Lane County. Public participation was and will continue to be essential to the development and acceptance of the plan. The Citizens Advisory Committee put in many hours over the course of more than a year and a half to help produce a plan that was biologically sound and met the many, sometimes conflicting, desires of the public. The numerous written and oral comments from the general public during the review of the plan are als.o appreciated.
Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 6 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 INTRODUCTION The Fish Management Policy of the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife ( ODFW) requires that management pl ans be prepared for each basin or management unit. The McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan (hereafter referred to as the McKenzie Plan) was developed to direct management of the fish resources of the McKenzie subbasin. The scope of the plan includes the mainstem McKenzie River, its tributaries, and Leaburg pool. Separate mini-plans will be written for reservoirs and lakes in the subbasin. ODFW is committed to the planning process as an integral part of all current and future management by the agency. The McKenzie Plan is one element of the Department's planning efforts. Species plans for coho, steelhead, trout and warmwater game fish have been adopted, and a management plan for chinook salmon is being prepared. These statewide plans guide the development of more localized plans for individual river basins and subbasins. Likewise the wiiiamette Basin Fish Management Plan (ODFW 1988) provides general guidance for management of the McKenzie and other subbasins within the Willamette Basin. These plans serve several needed functions. They present a logical, systematic approach to conserving our aquatic resources. They establish management priorities and direct attention to the most critical problems affecting our fisheries so that the Department's funds and personnel can be used accordingly. They inform the public and other agencies about the Department's management programs and provide them with the opportunity to help formulate those programs. The McKenzie Pl an was jointly developed by ODFW staff and a public advisory team from the McKenzie River/Eugene-Springfield area who represented a range of interests. In addition, a group that represented state, federal, and private timber management; Lane County; Eugene Water and Electric Board (EWEB); Oregon State University Department of Fisheries and Wildlife; and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE) was formed to identify and review habitat issues in the subbasin. The McKenzie Plan should not be viewed as the final statement on the management of the fish and fisheries in the subbasin. Planning is a continuing process. As conditions of the resources and desires of the public change and as new information is obtained, the plan must be responsive and evolve as well. The McKenzie Plan will be reviewed every other year to evaluate progress in achieving its objectives, to modify the plan where necessary, and to set priorities for carrying out the plan in the succeeding two years. This review will precede the preparation of ODFW's biennial budget, which is submitted to the legislature for funding.
Organization The plan is divided into sections that deal with habitat, the major fish species or groups of species, and angling access. Each of these sections contains:
-1-
Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 7 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 1. Background and Status--historical and current information on the topic of that section that helps explain the context of the guidelines, objectives, problems, and actions that follow. 2. Guidelines--constraints or principles developed specifically for management activities in the subbasin related to that species or topic. 3. Objectives--what is intended to be accomplished. 4. Problems--obstacles to achieving the objectives. 5. Recommended Actions--solutions or methods for dealing with the problems.
General Guidelines Besides the statewide species plans and the Willamette Plan, the McKenzie Plan must also conform to other established constraints. These include: 1. Legislation-~oregon Revised Statutes. 2. Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR)--Goals and policies for commercial and sport fishing regulations, fish management, and salmon hatchery operation, including the Wild Fish Management Policy. Portions of the McKenzie Plan adopted as Administrative ) Rules are contained in Appendix 3. 3. Procedures developed by ODFW--Manual for Fish Management (1977); A Department Guide for Introductions and Transfers of Finfish into Oregon Waters (1982). 4. Agreements with other agencies--e.g., U.S. Forest Service (USFS), Bureau of Land Management (BLM), USACE, Columbia River Compact, Northwest Power Planning Council, and EWEB. 5. Rules and regulations of other federal, state, and local jurisdictions--e.g., Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ), Department of Forestry (OSDF), Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD), Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC).
)
-2-
Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 8 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 IMPLEMENTATION Achieving the objectives of this plan within ODFW's budgetary and manpower limitations entails identifying priorities for funds and effort. The following actions are considered the highest priorities in the McKenzie subbasin: -- Increase natural production of spring. chinook. -- Maintain high numbers of wild trout in areas not stocked with hatchery trout. Monitor production and harvest of wild trout. Increase survival of spring chinook and summer steelhead downstream migrants. Reduce the impacts of Leaburg and Walterville canals on migration, spawning, rearing, and angling. Reduce the impacts of timber harvest activities on fish production. Increase bank angling access below Blue River.
-3-
Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 9 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 The highest management priorities (problems that must be overcome to a chi eve the objectives of the pl an) and the.i r funding status for habitat, each ·1 of the species or species groups, and angling access are listed below. These priorities are ranked on the basis of (1) the importance of the problem, (2) the likelihood that the problem can be solved or substanti.al progress can be made toward solving the problem, and (3) availability of funding. Additional problems of lower priority are identified in other sections of the plan. ' Requires action by Requires additional other Currently ODFW fundi ngb Priori tya agencies funded Short-term Long-term
HABITAT
1. Downstream passage through x X X Leaburg and Walterville canals and the Sullivan Plant at Willamette Falls (Obj, 1, Probs. 1, 10, 11)
2. Delayed migration of adults X below Leaburg and Walterville tailraces and the Ore-Aqua outfall (Obj. 1, Prob. 2)
3. Impacts of timber harvest X X X activities (Obj. 2, Probs. 5-9; Obj. 3, Prob. 1)
4. Impacts of Leaburg and X X Walterville canals on spawning and rearing (Obj. 2, Prob. 12) 5. · Impacts of water rel eases x from Cougar and Blue River reservoirs on migration, spawning, incubation, and rearing (Obj. 1, Prob. 4; Obj. 2, Prob. 1) \ 6, Loss of riparian habitat X X from development (Obj. 2, Prob. 2)
-4-
Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 10 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Requires action by Requires additional other . Currently ODFW fundin9b Prioritya agencies funded Short-term Long-term
RESIDENT TROUT
1. Insufficient information X on production and harvest of wild trout (Obj. 1, Prob. 2; Obj. 3, Prob. 2; Obj. 4, Prob. 1)
2. Inadequate ca.tch of X hatchery trout above Leaburg Dam (Obj. 3, Prob. 1)
3. Competition between X X summer steelhead and wild trout (Obj. 2, Prob. 1; Summer Steelhead, Obj. 2, Probs. 1, 2) SUMMER STEELHEAD
1. Downstream passage of X X smolts through Walterville canal and the Sullivan Plant at Willamette Falls (Obj. 1, Prob.2)
2. Late migration of smolts X (Obj. 1, Prob. 1)
3. Reduction of angling X X opportunities because of Leaburg and Walterville canals (Obj. 1, Prob. 3)
4. Crowding of anglers X (Obj. 1, Prob. 5)
-5- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 11 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Requires action by Requires additional other Currently ODFW fundin9b Pri oritya agencies funded Short-term Long-term
WINTER STEELHEAD
1. Interest in establishing X a fishery in the McKenzie River (Obj. 1, Prob. 1) SPRING CHINOOK
1. Downstream passage of X X X juveniles through Leaburg and Walterville canals, Blue River Dam, and the Sullivan Plant at Willamette Falls (Obj. 1, Prob. 3; Willamette Plan, Habitat Section, Obj. 1, Prob. 1) ' 2. Low levels of natural X ) production (Obj. 1, Probs. 2, 8; Willamette Plan, Spring Chinook, Obj. 1, Actions 5.1, 9.1, 9.2)
3. Control of diseases in X X hatchery fish (Willamette Plan, Spring Chinook, Obj. 1, Actions 1.1-1.3)
4. Reduction of angling X X opportunities because of Leaburg and Walterville canals (Obj. 2, Prob. 3) FALL CHINOOK
1. Straying of adults from X the Willamette River (Obj. 1, Prob. 1)
)
-6-
Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 12 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Re qui res action by Requires additional other Currently OOFW fun di n~b Pri oritya agencies funded Short-term Long-term
WHITEFISH
1. Lack of public awareness of X the angling opportunities (Obj, 1, Prob. 1) MISCELLANEOUS SPECIES
1. Lack of information on X abundance and distribution (Obj. 1, Prob. 1) ANGLING ACCESS
1. Lack of access for bank X X angling below Blue River (Obj. 1, Prob. 1)
2. Reduced boating access X X below Leaburg Dam because of flow diversion into Leaburg and Walterville canals (Obj. 2, Prob 1)
3. Limited boating access below X X Hayden Bridge (Obj. 2, Prob. 6) a Items in parentheses refer to the speoifio objeotives (obj.), problems (prob.), and aotions disouased in that aeotion of the plan. b Short-term indioates a need for additional funding for a limited duration; long-term indioates a need for a oontinuous souroe of funding.
-7- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 13 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 (USFS) HABITAT
Background and Status Basin Description The McKenzie subbasi n drains an area of about 1,300 square mil es from the west slope of the Cascades to the Willamette River (Figure 1). It comprises about 12% of the Willamette basin. More than 80% of the subbasin is in Lane County; the remainder is in Linn County (SWRB 1961). The mainstem of the McKenzie River originates at Clear Lake about 90 river miles (RM) from the mouth. The principal upper tributaries include Lost and Horse creeks, South Fork McKenzie River, Smith River, and Blue River. ) Lost Creek and Separation Creek, a major branch of Horse Creek, are fed by
-8- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 14 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 10123456 W I SCALE IN MILES
•25 RIVER. MILE lj WILDERNESS AREAS [] NATIONAL FOREST LANDS ~ BLM LANDS
Figure 1. Map of the McKenzie subbasin. -9- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 15 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 glaciers on the west flank of the Three Sisters peaks. The headwaters of Horse Creek and the South Fork lie in the Horse Lake and Mink Lake basins, respectively. Smith and Blue rivers drain forested slopes north of the mainstem. The other major tributaries of the McKenzie River are Quartz, Gate, and Camp creeks and the Mohawk River. There are about 1,040 miles of perennial streams in the subbasin (SWRB 1961). About 70% of the subbasin is federal land managed by the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) for timber production, wilderness areas, and other uses. The remaining area is largely privately owned. Timber production is the dominant economic activity. About three-fourths of the subbasin is commercial forest land, of which 63% is federally owned. Agriculture and outdoor recreation are also important contributors to the local economy. Most of the agricultural land is located in the lower third of the subbasin, including some along the Mohawk River and Camp Creek. The water resources, scenic beauty, fish, wildlife, and other natural features ideally suit the area to recreational uses. The McKenzie River has long been noted as one of the most popular rivers for fishing and boating in Oregon. During the 1983 trout season an estimated 54,000 anglers fished the McKenzie River from Blue River to Armitage Park. An additional 36,000 nonangling boaters used that same section of the river. Reservoirs in the subbasin also support considerable angling effort.
Physical and Biological Characteristics The McKenzie drainage traverses three geologic provinces, each with its own characteristic rock and soil types, vegetation, and climate, which strongly influence the nature of the streams in those areas. The upper portion of the mainstem McKenzie River above Belknap Springs (RM 75), South Fork McKenzie River, Horse Creek, and Lost/White Branch Creek originate in the High Cascades Province. This area is geologically young. Relatively recent volcanic activity is the dominant physical feature. Some of the lava flows are only a few hundred years old (Franklin and Dyrness 1973). Most of the subbasin lies within the Western Cascades Province. The geologic formations in this area are older than the High Cascades. Mass soil movements are common in areas with pyroclastic soils (Franklin and Dyrness 1973). Commercially valuable Douglas-fir, hemlock, and Western red cedar are the dominant tree species on the hill slopes; cottonwood, red alder, and bigleaf maple are also common along stream bottoms (USFS 1977). In small and intermediate-sized streams in the McKenzie subbasin and throughout the Northwest, large organic debris from trees along the streams may be the principal factor determining the characteristics of the aquatic habitat (Swanson and Lienkaemper 1978). Fire has historically been an important influence on the development of the forest community of the western Cascades. Fire affects the species composition, densities, and ages of trees and other vegetation within forested areas as well as the size of those areas. These changes, in turn, affect the flow, sediment, and other aspects of stream habitat and the abundance and
-10- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 16 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 diversity of wildlife (Black and Thomas 1978; Morrison and Swanson, unpublished). Frequent fires of low to moderate severity have been widespread \ in this section of the western Cascades; some extensive catastrophic fires ! have.also occurred (Means 1981; Stewart 1986; Morrison and Swanson, unpublished). Fire suppression and timber management practices have altered the ecological effects of fires in natural forests (Morrison and Swanson, unpublished). Near Springfield the McKenzie drainage enters the Willamette Valley Province, characterized by broad, almost level, alluvial terrain (Franklin and Dyrness 1973). Shrubs and hardwoods are more abundant than in the other two provinces. Much of the subbasin is mountainous. Elevations range from about 35D ft. above sea level near the mouth to more than 10,000 ft. on North Sister. About 90% of the drainage is above 1,000 ft. and 70% is above 2,000 ft. (SWRB 1961). The upper reaches flow through a lava plateau 5,500 to 6,000 ft. in elevation. Most of the subbasin consists of steep ridges and a narrow band of level land in the valleys along the McKenzie and Mohawk rivers. The flood plain broadens below Deerhorn (RM 25) to the mouth of the McKenzie. Most streams have steep gradients, particularly in their upper reaches (Table 1). Because of the high gradient of the mainstem above McKenzie Bridge, that section of the river is more popular for recreational whitewater boating than for angling, particularly angling from boats. Table 1. Gradients of the McKenzie River and tributaries (data from Hydrology Subcommittee 1963 and SWRB 1961). )
Average Length gradient Stream/section (mi.la (ft./mi.)
McKenzie River: Mouth to Hayden Bridge (RM 11.4) 11 7 Hayden bridge to Leaburg Dam (RM 35.4) 24 10 Leaburg Dam to Blue River (RM 53.6) 18 17 Blue River to McKenzie Bridge (RM 64.8)b 11 35 McKenzie Bridge to Trail Bridge Dam (RM 78.5)C 14 43 Trail Bridge Dam to Clear Lake (RM 86.2) 8 127 Mohawk River 26 31 Camp Creek 10 160 Gate Creek (including North Fork) 11 150 Quartz Creek 14 240 Blue River 17 83 South Fork McKenzie River 32 110 Horse Creek 26 130 a Rounded to nearest mite. b Etevation measured at uses stream gauge 1590 (RM 66.5). ) C Etevation measured at uses stream gauge 1588,5 (RM 78,1),
-11- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 17 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Precipitation increases with r1s1ng elevation. Average annual precipitation ranges from 40-50 in. near Springfield to 100-110 in. in the headwaters. November through January account for more than 42% of the annual precipitation, whereas June through September total only about 10%. About one-third of the precipitation above 4,000 ft. is snow. Snowfall accumulation exceeds 90 in. in the central cascades (SWRB 1961). Snowmelt percolating through the porous lava beds in the upper basin helps maintain cool waterand sustained flows in the mainstem and upper tributaries during the summer. The Mohawk River and Camp Creek watersheds are lower in elevation and, therefore, are subject to lower flows and higher temperatures during the summer and early fall. Average monthly flow measured in the McKenzie near Armitage Park (RM 3) ranges from about 2,500 cfs in August to 12,300 cfs in January (Figure 2). Normal flow patterns have been altered by dams, diversions, and water withdrawals for out-of-stream uses •
12000 • 10000 I ,..... • f:2 8000 ..._,,() •, :: 6000 I • 0 • ....J "•-• Lt.. 4000 '•, •I 2000 ·-·-• 0 0 N D J F M A M J J A s MONTH
Figure 2. Average monthly flow of the McKenzie River near Armitage (gage 14165500), 1964-72 (data from USGS).
The steep slopes, heavy rainfall, and unstable soils in portions of the subbasin in the Western Cascades have resulted in some landslides and debris torrents (mass movement of soil and debris down stream channels). Torrents
-12- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 18 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 in tributaries have impacted fish habitat by scouring the channels, depositing large amounts of sediment and debris, and increasing turbidity. ) The o.s.u. Department of Fisheries and Wildlife is investigating the effects of debris torrents on fish production and other stream characteristics in Quartz Creek, a tributary of Blue River. Timber harvest and road construction increase the frequency of landslides and debris torrents in streams in areas with unstable soils. In the H.J. Andrews Experimental Forest, the.rates of debris torrents in clearcut and roaded areas were 4.5 and 42 times, respectively, the rates in forested, unroaded areas (Swanston and Swanson 1976). On the Willamette National Forest, 58% of the land in the McKenzie subbasin managed primarily for timber production (General Forest allocation) is classified as having high-very high potential for erosion and landslides (Table 2). Private forest lands in the subbasin contain approximately 20-30% high risk soils (Thomas et al. 1969). Areas with a large proportion of unstable soils include Deer, Gate, Marten, and Quartz creek watersheds. Unstable areas occur on BLM land as well. The incidence of landslides in the McKenzie subbasin is lower than in some adjacent drainages and higher than in others. Special road-building and timber harvesting techniques are now used in an attempt to reduce landslides on public and private forest land. Table 2. Percentage of land in the McKenzie Planning Unit, Willamette National Forest, with high and very high potential for erosion and mass soil movement (data from USFS 1977).
Land use allocation Percentage )
General forest 58 Scenic influence I 51 Scenic influence II 48 Dispersed nonmotorized recreation/timber 10 Dispersed motorized recreation/timber 38 H.J. Andrews Experimental Forest 58 Other allocationsa 13 a Witder>ness, witder>ness study, PeseaPoh natuPat, speoiai intePest and undevetoped Poadtess P@OP@ation aPeas. The Leaburg and Walterville canals operated by the Eugene Water and Electric Board (EWEB) divert flow from a 13 mile section of the mainstem below Leaburg Dam to generate electricity. Each canal diverts most of the mainstem flow during the low flow period; however, EWEB is required to maintain specified flows in the mainstem adjacent to the canals (Table 3). •These requirements provide only minimum flows for fish production and angling. During May through October, when most angling and adult salmon and steelhead migration occurs, as much as 75% and 65% of the mainstem flow is diverted into Leaburg and Walterville canals, respectively (Table 4). Low flow in the angling opportunities are very limited in this section because of private land ownership.
-13-
Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 19 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Table 3. Minimum flows in the McKenzie River required of EWEB by federal power generation licenses.
Location Period Flow (cfs)
Past Leaburg Canal Year-round sooa Past Walterville Canal May 1,000 June 800 July 1-July 15 750 July 16-August 31 500 September 425 October-Apri 1 325
a The LegaL minimum reiease at Leaburg Dam is 465 cfs with provision for an additionai 35 cfs reieaaed at the McKenzie SaLmon Hatchery 2 miLes downstream.
Table 4. Average monthly diversion of fl ow into Leaburg and Wal tervill e canals, 1965 through 1969,
Leaburl;! Cana 1 Walterville Canal McKenzie Percentage Percentage River fl ow cfs of mainstem cfs of mainstem Month near Vida diverted flow diverted flow
January 6,856 2,160 31.5 2,200 32.1 February 4,745 2.240 47.2 2,060 43.4 March 3,741 2,300 61.2 . 2,040 54.4 April 3,897 2,260 58.0 1,940 49.8 May 4,151 2,140 51.6 . 1,920 46.3 June 3,066 1,680 54.8 1,660 54.1 July 2,281 1,580 69.3 1,480 64.9 August 2,191 1,650 75.3 1,220 55. 7 September 2,419 1,740 71.9 1,460 60.4 October 2,939 1,970 67.0 1,810 61.6 November 4,417 2,000 45.3 2,010 45.5 December 6,765 2,170 32.1 2,160 31.9 Average 3,956 1,991 50.3 1,830 46.3
-14- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 20 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 In 1983 OOFW recommended increasing the minimum flow in the mainstem adj acent to the Lea burg and Wa 1 tervi 11 e cana 1 s. In 1987 EWEB funded a study 1 using the Instream Flow Incremental Methodology to more definitively determine flow requirements for fish production, angling, and other recreation in this section. Mortality and injury of spring chinook and steelhead juveniles that enter the Leaburg and Wal tervi 11 e canals and pass through the turbines has been a prime concern. Studies conducted in 1981 and 1982 indicated that smolts released above both projects sustained an overall mortality of 30% to 47% (Smith and Zakel 1981; Smith et al. 1982). Fish released into Leaburg canal suffered 28% mortality. About 13% of the smolts that entered Walterville canal were killed. In 1983 EWEB installed a screen and smolt bypass system in Leaburg canal. This allows year-round flow diversion into the canal. The effectiveness of the screening system in protecting downstream mi grants is being evaluated. Testing to date indicated that 2% of the spring chinook smolts released in the canal above the screen are injured or killed. These reductions in losses of smolts are encouraging; however, mortality rates for spring chinook fry, which account for most of the downstream migrants, continue to be substantial--15% for fry larger than 45 mm and 56% for fry less than 40 mm.
Walterville canal is currently closed for 3 to 5 days after the release of hatchery spring chi nook and steel head smol ts and when flows in the mai nstem next to the canal fall below 1,300 cfs during peak migration periods (March 15 through June 1 and October 15 through November 30). Six dams have been constructed on the McKenzie River and its tributaries (Figure 1) primarily for hydroelectric generation and flood control. Leaburg Dam (RM 39) was constructed by EWEB in the late 1920s to divert water into the Leaburg canal. Cougar Dam on the South Fork of the McKenzie River and Blue River Dam on Blue River were completed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE) in 1963 and 1968, respectively. EWEB's Carmen-Smith Hydroelectric Development, completed in 1963, consists of three dams. Carmen Dam (RM 84.2) diverts water about 2 miles through a tunnel to Smith River Reservoir. Water from Smith River Reservoir created by Smith River Dam is then routed through another tunnel back to the Carmen Power plant on the McKenzie River at the head of Trail Bridge Reservoir. Power is also generated at the Trail Bridge Dam (RM 78.5). Strube Dam, which would be located on the South Fork about 2 miles below Cougar Dam, has been authorized by Congress but has not been funded and is currently not being actively planned or developed. USAGE also previously proposed a dam for Gate Creek, but it has been deauthorized. Dams 'have had a variety of impacts on fish habitat and production. Dams pose barriers to migrating fish, particularly salmon and steelhead adults and juveniles. Leaburg Dam is the only dam in the subbasin with upstream and downstream fish passage facilities. Cougar Dam blocked access of spring chinook to a major spawning area. Some spring chinook also spawned in areas
-15-
Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 21 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 above Blue River and Trail Bridge dams prior to their construction. Past attempts to collect and haul adult spring chinook above Cougar Dam and to collect the smolts produced and pass them downstream were largely unsuccessful. Except for Leaburg Dam, the dams have blocked movement of trout and other resident species and have inundated areas that formerly produced native species of stream fishes. Cougar and Blue River dams have also altered the flow and temperature of the South Fork McKenzie River, Blue River, and the mainstem McKenzie River below the projects. The principal functions of these two projects are flood control, power generation (Cougar only), navigation, and irrigation (Perron Partnership P.C. 1974a, 1974b). Blue River Reservoir is normally filled from February through mid-May and is maintained at full pool until early July, when drawdown begins to increase downstream flow in the McKenzie and Willamette rivers for navigation, irrigation, fish production, and pollution abatement. Blue River Reservoir is the first reservoir drained annually in the Willamette Basin. Cougar Reservoir follows a similar schedule for filling; drawdown usually begins about mid-July. Both reservoirs reach minimum pool level for flood control about mid-November. In general, the projects have reversed natural flow and temperature patterns during spring through fall. Flow and temperature below Cougar and Blue River dams are decreased in the spring and summer when the reservoirs are filled and are increased in the late summer and fall during drawdown. These effects are most apparent in Blue River and the South Fork. Flow and temperature changes in the McKenzie River are moderated by mainstem flow from above the confluences of Blue River and the South Fork. Drawdown of Blue River Reservoir increases summer flow in Blue River below the dam 400-1,500%. Water temperature in Blue River below the dam is as much as 12°c lower prior to drawdown and is about 6°C higher in late September and October. The South Fork below Cougar Dam is up to 8°C cooler during the summer and 3°C warmer in the fall. The combined effects of both projects on the flow of the McKenzie River have been a 30-50% reduction in February through June flow and a similar increase in August through October flows. Mainstem temperature downstream to Leaburg Dam averaged about l.2°C lower from June through early September and about 1.2°C higher from mid-September through November (Morse et al. 1987). Fisheries concern has focused primarily on the impact of the temperature changes on spring chinook production. Cooler water during the summer may delay migration of adults, and warmer water in the fall may accelerate incubation of the eggs, resulting in premature emergence of the fry. An increase of 1°C in water temperature of the Rogue River below Elk Creek Dam during January alone reduces survival of spring chinook fry an estimated 60-80% (memorandum dated 21 February 1985 from S. Cramer and M. Jennings, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Corvallis, to H. Wagner, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Portland). The temperature reduction during summer may also decrease the growth of chinook fry and other species such as trout, but the precise effects of the temperature and flow changes on fish production have not been determined. Aquatic insects are an important food source for fish. Production of aquatic insects in the McKenzie subbasin is abundant and diverse (interview on
-16-
Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 22 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 May 15, 1987 with R. Hafele, DEQ, Portland, Dr.). Major groups include caddis, mayflies, stoneflies, and midges. The relative proportions of the functional feeding groups (shredders, collectors, scrapers, filterers, and predators) vary according to season and stream size (Hawkins and Sedell 1981). The principal hatches are the March brown mayfly ( Rhithrogena morrisoni) (February-April), green "McKenzie" caddis ( Aratopsyahe grandis) (May-June), and October caddis (Diahosomoeaus spp.) (September-October). In 1950 portions of the subbasin were sprayed with DDT to control spruce budworm. Other terrestrial and aquatic insects were also killed (OSGC, unpublished data). Given the ability of insects to rapidly reproduce and recolonize, this spraying is not considered to have had long-tenn effects on aquatic insect production.
Habitat Management Agencies A variety of federal, state, and local agencies are involved in management activities that affect the fisheries of the t,t;Kenzie subbasin. In most cases ODFW serves in an advisory role to other agencies that have direct responsibility for regulating land and water use activities. u.s. forest Service: The Forest Service (USFS) (Willamette National Forest) manages approximately 500,0DO acres in the McKenzie subbasin. This encompasses much of the mainstem and tributaries of the McKenzie River above the mouth of Blue River (RM 53.6) (~igure 1). The principal tributaries in this area are Blue River; South Fork McKenzie River; and Horse, Lost/White Branch, Deer, and Quartz creeks. Anadromous fish use about 51 miles of these streams, primarily the mainstem McKenzie River and Lost and Horse creeks; trout and other species occur in 251 miles of streams in the national forest (Table 5). Table 5. Miles of fish habitat on Blue River and McKenzie ranger districts, Willamette National Forest (from Skeesick and Stewart 1982).
Anadromous fish Stream miles with Ranger district/stream stream mil es other species
Blue River R.D. Blue River, Gate Creek 1.5 54.1 S.F. McKenzie, Quartz Creek 6.2 67.5 Wilderness streams 0 23.4 Total 7.7 145.0 McKenzie R.D. McKenzie River, Horse Creek 40.7. 87.1 Wilderness streams 2.2 18. 7 Total 42.9 105.8
\ j
-17-
Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 23 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Almost half of the national forest land in the subbasin has been designated as wilderness (Table 6). The wilderness area is located primarily in the uppermost portion of the drainage and contains only 2 miles of streams used by anadromous fish and 17% of the miles of streams on USFS land used by trout and other species (Table 5). About 37% of USFS land is allocated as General Forest (Table 6), which is managed primarily for timber production. Table 6. Land-use allocations in the McKenzie planning unit, Willamette National Forest (data from USFS).
Land use allocation Acres Percentage
Wi 1de mess 222,063 46 Research natural area 2,580 Studies conducted in the H.J. Andrews Experimental Forest have been very valuable in increasing our understanding of stream ecology and forest management in the McKenzie subbasin and throughout the Northwest. Since 1948 almost 600 publications related to research conducted there have been produced. Those studies have dealt extensively with the physical and biological characteristics of streams, effects of timber management practices on stream habitat and cutthroat trout production, and development of techniques to minimize negative impacts of timber management (McKee et al. 1987). Stream habitat in areas allocated for wilderness, wilderness study, research natural areas, special interest, old growth timber groves, and undeveloped roadless recreation areas are expected to remain in relatively good condition. However, the proportion of the total stream miles in these areas is low (Tables 5 and 7). Timber harvesting and road construction adversely affect fish habitat in streams in the General Forest and H. J.Andrews Experimental Forest and, to a lesser extent, Scenic Influence I and II allocations (USFS 1977). Impacts on fish habitat in those areas typically include increased water tenperatures, lower dissolved oxygen, reduced food supply, reduced spawning area, increased toxic substances and sedimentation, -18- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 24 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 increased flows (USFS 1977), and reduced large woody debris. The areas where those impacts occur contain about 90% of the stream miles in nonwilderness areas on national forest 1 and in the subbasi n (Table 7). Table 7. Miles of stream by classa in the McKenzie Planning unit, Willamette National Forest (modified from USFS 1977). Percentage Percentage Class Class of Class of Land use Allocation I I I Class I-II I II Class III Old growth timber groves 1 0 <1 0 0 Research natural area 0 2 <1 0 0 Special interest area 4 0 2 0 0 Undeveloped roadless recreation area 4 13 6 15 8 Dispersed nonmotorized recreation/timber 3 0 1 0 0 Scenic influence I 64 10 28 10 5 Scenic influence II 39 13 20 17 9 H.J. Andrews Experimental Forest 0 14 5 10 5 General forest 17 80 37 147 73 201 Total 132 132 ) ; a ciass I and II ar>e fish-bear>ing str>eams; oiass III ar>e headwater> str>eams that do not oontain fish. USFS attempts to reduce those impacts through improvements in management practices and technology, such as road planning and construction and logging methods. Streamside Management Units are established along Class I, II, and III streams to protect instream and riparian habitat. However, it is unlikely that aquatic habitat in the General Forest area and the Andrews Experimental Forest, where intensive timber management occurs, will recover to natural levels of productivity in the immediate future (USFS 1977). Projects have been undertaken by USFS to improve habitat in Horse Creek (side channel development for summer rearing and instream structures to create pools), South Fork (side channel development and development of barrow pit ponds for rearing), Oeer Creek (side channel development and boulder placements), and Blue River Reservoir (planting vegetation in the drawdown zone). The current plan that directs management of the Willamette National Forest (USFS 1977) is based on USFS policies and federal legislation (i.e., the Multiple Use/Sustained Yield Act, the National Forest Management Act, the Wilderness Act, and the National Fish Management Policy, and the Endangered Species Act). Management of fish habitat on national forest land will be guided during the next decade by a revised forest management plan that has -19- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 25 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 nearly been completed and the recent National Fish Management Policy. Future efforts will be directed at more intensive monitoring of land management activities and their effects and increased habitat improvement activities. Two memoranda of understanding jointly agreed upon by ODFW, the Pacific Northwest Region of USFS, and the Willamette National Forest describe the respective responsibilities of the agencies and the necessary coordination to achieve mutual goals for fish and wildlife resources. Bureau of land Management: The Eugene District of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) administers about 52,000 acres in the McKenzie subbasin. Most of these lands are located in the Mohawk River drainage (Figure 1). Other watersheds with major BLM holdings include Marten and Bear creeks. These areas are largely second growth forests managed primarily for timber production. Many of the streams in the Mohawk drainage were splash-dammed when they were previously logged. Larger trees in most of the riparian areas containing old growth have been removed (interview on 28 May 1987 with Neil Armantrout, BLM, Eugene). BLM and ODFW have a cooperative agreement concerning mutual goals for fish production and habitat management. Fish habitat on BLM lands is currently managed on the basis of the O&C Forest Resources Policy and a land use plan and its final Environmental Impact Statement that were issued in 1983. BLM gui_delines for protection of soil and water resources include: 1. Meeting or exceeding Oregon Forest Practices rules. 2. Protecting riparian zones along streams on third order and larger streams. (Roads and yarding corridors are allowed.) 3. Setting aside some areas considered unsuitable for sustained timber production in order to protect watersheds. A new management plan for the Eugene District of BLM for 1990-2000 is being prepared. A fish habitat management plan for BLM lands in the McKenzie subbasin will be written following approval of this MeKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan. A proposal for habitat improvement projects in Mohawk River drainage has been submitted by BLM to the Northwest Power Planning Council. U.S. Anny Corps of Engineers: USAGE operates Cougar and Blue River dams and reservoirs. Since 1938 the Corps has also constructed 29 revetments in the lower 25 miles of the McKenzie River to stabilize streambanks. The probability of additional bank stabilization projects on the mainstem is low because of the lack of adequate economic justification and because of federal legislation passed in 1986 that requires that 25% of the costs of the projects be funded by the local sponsor (interview on 8 May 1987 with R. Gamble, USAGE, Portland). All of the previous projects were totally federally funded. USAGE also shares jurisdiction with the Division of State Lands for projects involving filling along streams. -20- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 26 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Northwest Power Planning Council: The Northwest Power Act passed by Congress in 1980 directs the Power Planning Council to develop a program to protect and enhance fish in the Columbia Basin affected by hydroelectric development. The Council's Fish and Wildlife Program includes the following measures for the McKenzie subbasin: Section 400 (14) Construction of a juvenile bypass facility in the Leaburg canal (completed) Measure 404 (bl (15) Studies to design a juvenile bypass system for the Walterville canal (not yet funded) Measure 704(b) (11) Study to determine flows needed for fish production in the mainstem adjacent to the Leaburg and Walterville canals ( begun in 1986) Measure 704 (cl Completion of a study to detennine the feasibility of installing devices to regulate temperatures of water released from Cougar and Blue River dams (Phase I completed) Measure 704 (d) Development of adult spring chinook collection facilities and juvenile passage facilities at Cougar and Blue River dams (not yet funded) Rearing of juvenile spring chinook in Cougar and Blue River reservoirs (Blue River is currently used for rearing; rearing in Cougar Reservoir depends on improving juvenile passage facilities at the dam.) U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service: These two agencies review federal projects (e.g., USACE) and permits(e.g., Federal Energy Regulatory Commission) to evaluate their impacts on fish and wildlife. Oregon Water Resources Department and Water Resources Conlnission: Water uses in the subbasin are regulated by the state Water Resources Commission. Specific uses adopted for the mainstem of the McKenzie River from the mouth to the Linn-Lane county line (RM 77) include domestic, livestock, municipal, irrigation, limited power development, recreation, and fish and wildlife uses. Water from the upper McKenzie from above the mouth of Smith River (RM 78.5) to Middle (Koosah) Falls (RM 84.7), from Smith River, and from Bunchgrass Creek are restricted to domestic, livestock, lawn and garden irrigation (half-acre maximum), hydroelectric power, recreation, and fish and wildlife uses (SWRB 1964; 1985). Above Middle Falls use of the river is -21- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 27 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 restricted to domestic, livestock, lawn and garden irrigation, recreation, and fish and wildlife uses. Miniml.Bll streamflows for two sites on the mainstem and four tributaries were adopted in 1964 (Table 8). No additional minimum streamflows have been recommended or adopted since then. Water rights have been granted for a total of 4,009 cfs (WRD, unpublished): Use Quantity (cfs) I rri gati on 136 Livestock 0.5 Domestic 4 Municipal (Eugene) 27 Commercial/industrial 99 Power 3,480 Fi sh 254 Other 8 It should be understood that these are rights to divert water. In many cases the actual quantities diverted, used, or consumed are less than listed. The principal use for diverted water is power production at EWEB generating facilities. Water released from Cougar Reservoir is also used for power generation, but no water right is required. Four small hydroelectric projects totalling 20 cfs are complete, and two other projects totalling 43 cfs are in various stages of development. Water is used for fish production at Leaburg and McKenzie state fish hatcheries and at Ore-Aqua private hatchery. Most of the commercial/industrial use is for operation of the Weyerhaeuser mill in Spri ngfi el d. Oregon State Department of Forestry: The Department of Forestry (OSDF) is responsible for regulating commercial timber production and harvest on private land and manages approximately 1,650 acres of state land in the subbasin. Rules of the Forest Practices Act establish the standards for private and state forestry activities to protect fish habitat. Those rules were modified in April 1987 to improve protection of riparian habitat, to broaden the waters classified for fish production, and to provide additional protection to small tributaries important for maintaining cool water downstream during summer. -22- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 28 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Table 8. Minimum perennial streamflows (cfs) adopted for the McKenzie River subbasin. Year-round minimum Priority Location fl ow date South Fork McKenzie River at mouth 200 06/22/64 (Additional from storage releases only) 230 06/22/64 Blue River at mouth 30 06/22/64 (Additional from storage releases only) 350 06/22/64 McKenzie. River at Vida 1,400 06/22/64 (Additional from storage rel eases only) 580 06/22/64 Gate Creek at mouth 20 06/22/64 Mohawk River at mouth 20 06/22/64 McKenzie River at I-5 1,025 06/22/64 (Additional from storage releases only) 700 06/22/64 Division of State Lands: The Division of State Lands (DSL) is responsible for regulating the removal and filling of materials, such as gravel, in waterways. Permits are required for projects involving 50 cubic yards or more of material. Applications for permits are reviewed by ODFW. ODFW may request protective measures or denial of the permit based on impacts of the project on fish production. However, the final decision on the permit is made by DSL. The largest gravel deposits are located along the lower 20 miles of the river, where the floodplain broadens and gradient is relatively low. There are currently four commercial gravel operations: three below Hayden Bridge and one above Bellinger Landing. A permit has also been granted for another site above Bellinger Landing, but it is not active. Gravel removal is not permitted in the flowing portion of the river. Department of Environmental Quality: The Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) is responsible for managing water quality and enforcing state water quality standards. There are no special water quality standards for the McKenzie subbasin. Waste discharge permits are issued by DEQ. Waste discharges are not permitted in the McKenzie subbasin above McKenzie Bridge in order to protect water supplies for municipal and recreational uses (OAR 41-470 (1) (b)). Department of Land Conservation and Development, Land Conservation and Development Collllllission and Lane and Linn Counties: Land use is regulated on the state level by Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) and -23- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 29 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC). County land use plans must in turn comply with statewide land-use goals. Land-use plans have been helpful in protecting fish habitat, particularly by curtailing excessive development along streams. The Lane County riparian protection ordinance prescribes minimum setbacks for development on property along streams classified for fish production. In forest and agriculture zones new construction may be no closer than 100 ft. from the stream. In other zones the setback is 50 ft. In addition, no more than 25% of the riparian vegetation can be removed. The county flood plain ordinance and the sand and gravel ordinance also contain provisions dealing with filling, grading, and dredging in the flood plain, erosion control measures, and sand and gravel removal that relate to fish habitat. -24- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 30 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Guidelines Guideline 1. Potential losses of fish production from habitat degradation will be prevented or reduced to the extent possible. GDi\ \; Guideline 2. Proposed habitat improvement projects should be jointly reviewed and prioritized annually by.ODFW and the participating land management agencies. Objectives Maintain or improve upstream and downstream passage for fish. Asswnptions and Rationale 1. Maintaining or improving passage conditions is necessary to meet the management objectives for fish in the subbasin, particularly anadromous species. 2. Spawning ground surveys and adult counts at Leaburg Dam provide some indication of passage problems. 3. Responsibility for improving fish passage at man-made facilities lies with the owners or operators of the facilities. Fish passage at natural barriers is provided where appropriate and maintained by state and federal agencies, volunteer groups (e.g., STEP), and individuals [Willamette Basin Fish Management PLan (ODFW 1988)]. Problems and Reaommended Aations Problem 1, Some juvenile and adult steelhead and chinook salmon produced in the McKenzie subbasin are injured, killed and or delayed at Willamette Falls. Recommended actions for this problem are addressed in the Habitat section of the Willamette Plan (ODFW 1988). Problem 2. Adult summer steelhead and spring chinook are delayed and sometimes injured at the Ore-Aqua hatchery outfall, the rack in Walterville canal, and the tailrace of the Leaburg powerhouse. Action 2.1 Work with the owner of the Ore-Aqua hatchery to modify the outfall and to reduce attraction of fish to to the outfal 1. Action 2.2 Continue to work with EWEB to install and maintain the rack in Walterville canal from approximately March 15 through October 1 and to insure that there are adequate attraction flows in the bypass channel below the rack. -25- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 31 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Action 2.3 Continue to work with EWEB to dewater the Walterville and Leaburg canals below the powerhouses when necessary, to increase flow in the mainstem adjacent to the canals, or use other appropriate methods. Problem 3. Upstream migration of trout and spring chinook is sometimes delayed at Leaburg Dam. Negotiate with EWEB to routinely conduct the following actions: Action 3.1 Release water through the roll gates in the dam in a manner so that fish are attracted to the new ladder. Action 3.2 Monitor attraction flows and passage in the new ladder and adjust flows if necessary. Action 3.3 Improve passage up the old ladder next to the canal based on recommendations developed by ODFW. Action 3.4 Reduce siltation at the exit area of the fishway by dredging or other methods. Problem 4. Release of cold water from Cougar and Blue River dams delays migration of spring chinook and trout above Leaburg Dam. Action 4.1 Cooperate with USAGE to determine the costs and benefits of retrofitting Cougar and Blue River dams to regulate the temperature of water releases. Problem 5. Several natural and man-made barriers (e.g., culverts, diversion dams, log jams, and falls) hinder fish passage. Action 5.1 Work with land management agencies and landowners to evaluate barriers and improve passage where necessary and feasible. Problem 6. Migration of adult spring chinook and steelhead is delayed in the mainstem below Leaburg Dam where flow is reduced by diversion into the Leaburg and Walterville can.al s. Action 6.1 Negotiate with EWEB to provide adequate flow for fish migration. A study using the In stream Fl ow Incremental Methodology is underway to evaluate flows for passage. Problem 7. Cougar Dam blocks passage of adult spring chinook, and smolt colle.ction and passage facilities are inadequate. Action 7.1 Evaluate the costs and benefits of using Cougar Reservoir to rear hatchery fingerlings versus naturally spawned juveniles produced from adults trapped below the dam and hauled to release sites above. -26- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 32 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Action 7.2 Resolve the possible trade-offs between spring chinook and trout production in Cougar Reservoir by developing a miniplan for management of Cougar Reservoir. Action 7.3 Negotiate with USACE to apply new technology as it develops to improve smolt collection and passage facilities at Cougar Dam. Problem 8. There is no collection facility for adult spring chinook returning to Blue River. Action 8.1 Include consideration of an adult collection facility in any plans for retrofitting Blue River Dam for electrical generation. Use of the adults collected will need to be determined. Problem 9. Some spring chinook smolts may be injured or killed migrating out of Blue River Reservoir. Action 9,1 Negotiate with USACE to determine the extent of smolt injuries and mortalities and improve passage if necessary. Problem 10. Some adult and juvenile spring chinook and steelhead that pass downstream through the turbines at the Walterville powerhouse are injured or killed. \ Action 10,1 Coordinate with EWEB to determine the extent of ! juvenile injuries and mortalities. Action 10.2 Encourage EWEB to make necessary improvements to reduce entry of fish into Walterville canal. Problem 11. Evaluation of the screen installed in Leaburg Canal to protect salmonids migrating downstream has not been completed. Action 11.1 Complete the evaluation of the screen and work with EWEB to implement recommendations. Problem 12. Some fish that enter smaller diversions (e.g., Cedar Flat, Coburg canal) are injured or killed. Action 12.1 Determine the extent of the injuries and mortalities; screen or use other methods to protect downstream migrants if necessary. Problem 13. The survival of spring chinook smolts produced or released above Leaburg Dam may be reduced by delayed migration through the Leaburg pool and by injuries sustained passing through the roll gates in Leaburg Dam. Action 13.1 Release tagged groups of smolts above and below Leaburg Dam and compare the relative rates of survival. / -27- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 33 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 ,Objective 2. Provide optimum flow, water quality, and physical habitat characteristics in the McKenzie River and tributaries for fish production. Assumptions and Rationaie 1. High quality habitat is essential for optimum fish production and angling. 2. Fish habitat has been altered by dams, diversions, and land-use practices. 3, The McKenzie River is noted for its high quality water and relatively constant fl ow. 4. Legal minimum flows that have been adopted and state and federal water quality standards help protect fish habitat in the subbasin. Improvements in water quality in the Willamette River have also benefitted salmon and steelhead production. PPobtems and Reaommended Aations Problem 1. Changes in water temperature, flow, and turbidity resulting from releases of water from Cougar and Blue River dams have probably reduced production of spring chinook and trout. Action 1.1 Negotiate with USAGE to determine production losses and necessary mitigation or compensation. Action 1.2 Cooperate with USAGE to determine the costs and benefits of retrofitting Cougar and Blue River dams to regulate the temperature of water releases. Action 1.3 Develop recommendations to improve flow within the constraints of USACE's release schedules. Action 1,4 Work with USAGE and DEQ to determine methods to reduce the turbidity of water released from Blue River Reservoir. Land-use practices in the watersheds above the project that contribute to the turbidity problem are addressed in other problems discussed under this objective. Problem 2. Residential and commercial development can reduce the quantity and quality of riparian habitat. Action 2.1 Work with Lane County to strengthen the riparian protection ordinance. Action 2.2 Support continuation of existing zoning in areas where increased density of development is likely to impact fish habitat or angling. These areas will be identified and provided to the Lane County Land Management Division. -28- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 34 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Problem 3. Management plans being drafted for federal lands should contain adequate provisions for protection of fish habitat. Action 3.1 Review USFS and BLM forest management plans and make recommendations related to fish habitat. Problem 4. Habitat protection needs of streams in the subbasin have not been analyzed to provide more specific guidance to state forest practices foresters. Action 4.1 Develop recommendations for protection of stream habitat in the subbasin with respect to shade, large woody ~1•11.~· I debris, stream bed stability,and structural requirements, as recommended by the Riparian Habitat Technical Task Force (Carleson and Wilson 1985). Problem 5. In some cases rules of the Forest Practices Act and USFS and BLM guidelines for habitat protection of fish-bearing streams are inconsistently applied, Action 5.1 Enco~rage timber management agencies to develop procedures for improving compliance with rules and guidelines to protect fish habitat. · Problem 6, Current rules and guidelines for forest practices on private and public land do not adequately protect some smaller streams that contribute to habitat quality in fish-bearing streams. Action 6.1 Continue to support additional timber management rules and guidelines to protect smaller streams (i.e., class 2 of the DOF classification, classes 3 and 4 of the USFS classification, and orders 1 and 2 of the BLM classification). Additional work is needed to identify problem areas and to develop guidelines for protection. Problem 7. Detailed recommendations of fish biologists are not requested or provided during planning of some timber harvests and logging road construction that may affect fish habitat. Action 7.1 Provide comprehensive field reviews and written recommendations prior to all timber harvest activities that are likely to impact fish habitat. Reviews should be conducted by staff fish biologists of USFS and BLM on federal lands. Additional personnel or shifts in duties of existing personnel will be needed for ODFW to adequately review harvest activities on private timber land. Problem 8. Timber harvest activities that affect fish habitat in many streams are not routinely inspected after completion and the deficiencies identified are not necessarily corrected. ) -29- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 35 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Action 8.1 Encourage USFS, BLM, and 0SDF to increase monitoring of timber harvest activities for compliance with rules, guidelines, and recommendations for habitat protection. (BLM has recently improved its post-sale monitoring process in the subbasin.) Problem 9. Erosion, landslides, and debris torrents are increased by road building and timber harvest in areas with unstable soils. Action 9.1 Support continued refinements in land classification methods to identify slide-prone areas. Action 9.2 Support continued investigation of the impacts of debris torrents on fish production. Action 9.3 In cooperation with the USFS, BLM, 0SU, and 0SDF, develop specific recommendations for timber harvest and road construction in unstable areas in the McKenzie drainage. Problem 10. Riprap and channelization to control streambank erosion eliminate riparian vegetation and habitat complexity. Action 10.1 Work with agencies and landowners to use alternative methods of erosion control where bank protection is needed. Problem 11. Flow may be reduced by diversions and water withdrawals. Action 11.l Where necessary, apply for instream water rights or recommend additional sites for adoption of minimum s treamfl ow by the WRC. Action 11.2 Support additional legislation and regulations to protect streamflow for fish production. Problem 12. Diversion of water into Leaburg and Walterville canals probably reduces spawning and rearing habitat in adjacent sections of the mainstem. Action 12,1 Negotiate with EWEB to provide adequate flow in the mainstem for spawning and rearing. A study using the Instream Flow Incremental Methodology is underway to evaluate flow for fish production. Problem 13. Gravel removal has damaged riparian and instream habitat and stranded fish. Action 13.1 Work with DSL and permit applicants to minimize habitat damage and fish losses. Problem 14. Chemical pollutants in waste discharge and run-off may degrade stream habitat. -30- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 36 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Action 14.1 Encourage DEQ and Weyerhaeuser Corp. to continue monitoring effluent discharged from the Weyerhaeuser mill for possible biological impacts on fish production and to eva 1uate methods to reduce the vi sua 1 imp act of the plume below the outfall. Other actions to reduce chemical water pollutants are included in the Willamette Plan (ODFW 1988). Objective 3. Restore and enhance riparian and instream habitat to meet the production objectives for the fish species in the subbasin. Asswnptions and Rationaie 1. Habitat restoration and enhancement will increase natural production. 2. ODFW will provide assistance with habitat improvement projects. Problems and Recommended Actions Problem 1. Timber harvest activities have reduced the age and species diversity of riparian plant communities that contribute to fish production in many tributaries. Action 1.1 Plant multiple species (e.g, cedar, cottonwood, Douglas Fir, and and hemlock) in riparian areas lacking \ diversity. , Action 1.2 Add structure, particularly large wood, to streams where needed. Action 1.3 Support standards in the Forest Practices Act and federal land management plans that protect age and species diversity of vegetation in riparian management areas. Problem 2. Current physical and biological survey methods generally do not adequately identify habitat factors that 1 imi t production. Action 2.1 Support development of an improved habitat survey method to help determine needed habitat improvements. Action 2.2 Support continued research on habitat factors that influence fish production. Problem 3. Physical and biological stream surveys are lacking for many streams, particularly on private land. Action 3.1 In coordination with USFS, BLM, private land- owners, and volunteers, survey streams to determine specific habitat problems and opportunities for habitat improvement projects. -31- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 37 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Problem 4. There is little spawning gravel for spring chinook below Cougar and Blue River dams, and the dams have eliminated future recruitment of gravel from upstream areas. Action. 4.1 Introduce spawning gravel in areas of the South Fork and Blue River below Cougar and Blue River dams if determined to be effective and feasible. Problem 5. Additional support for habitat improvement projects in the subbasin is needed. Action 5.1 Encourage STEP and other volunteer efforts. Action 5.2 Encourage agencies, such as USFS, BLM, and NPPC, to obtain additional funds to improve habitat. -32- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 38 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 ) (P. Howell) RESIDENT TROUT Background and Status Origin Rainbow, cutthroat, and bull trout (commonly called Dolly Varden) are native species in the subbasin. Small populations of brook trout also occur in upper areas of the subbasin as a result of introductions into several high elevation lakes prior to 1960. Fingerling hatchery rainbow trout were stocked in the McKenzie River as early as 1921. Fingerling releases continued through the early 1950s when studies indicated that their survival and contribution to the trout fishery were poor (Oregon State Game Commission (OSGC), unpublished data). Stocking of legal-sized rainbow began in 1947 in response to concern over an apparent decline in the number and size of fish caught. Three hatchery stocks of rainbow trout have been released in the subbasin: McKenzie, Roaring River, and Cape Cod. Early releases originated from native, spring-spawning McKenzie River stock. Wild adults were trapped ) for broods tock at Leaburg Dam. Some of these fish may have inadvertently been -33- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 39 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 crossed with a fall-spawning stock from Utah thought to have been derived from Oak Springs or Roaring River stock. A comparative study of McKenzie and Roaring River stocks was conducted from 1949 through 1952. The survival of the McKenzie stock in the hatchery was lower. The fall-spawning Roaring River stock were also caught at a higher rate and reached larger size since they had a few months of additional growth as a result of earlier spawning (Chris Jensen, OSGC, unpublished). Release of Roaring River stock continued through the early 1980s. Another study comparing the Roaring River stock and Cape Cod stock, also a fall-spawning rainbow trout, was undertaken in the Willamette Basin in the mid-1970s (Moring 1976). Angler catches of Cape Cod stock were significantly higher since Roaring River stock migrated downstream out of the angling area to a greater extent. All releases in the McKenzie River since 1982 have been Cape Cod stock. Di stri buti on Native rainbow, often called "McKenzie redsides," occur in the mainstem McKenzie upstream to Tamolitch Falls and in the lower portions of medium-to-large sized tributaries above Leaburg Dam (e.g., Indian, Gate, Marten, Deer, Quartz, and Horse creeks and Blue River, South Fork McKenzie, and Smith River). Cutthroat are found throughout the basin, including areas above Tamolitch Falls and small, higher gradient tributaries not inhabited by rainbow trout. During late spring and summer, they are more numerous than rainbow in the mainstem up to Hayden Bridge (RM 11.4), but the proportion of cutthroat trout in that section declines during the fall and winter as fish apparently move into tributaries (Moring and Youker 1979) (Table 9; Figure 3). Rainbow trout predominate in the mainstem between Hayden Bridge and the. upper limit of their distribution. -34- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 40 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Table 9. Wild cutthroat and rainbow trout captured by electrofishing in the McKenzie River, 24 May 1978 to 29 January 1979 (modified from Moring and \ Youker 1979). ' No. of Cutthroat Area rainbow No. Percentage Upper rivera: 05/25/78 14 0 o.o 07 /11/78 90 1 1.1 Lower riverb: 05/24/78 37 73 66.4 07 /18/78 41 99 70.7 08/29/78 43 81 65.3 10/05/78 33 29 46.8 01/29/79 29 1 3.3 ~ Belknap to Silver Creek Landing (24 mi.) Hayden Bridge to mouth ( 11 mi. ) Bull trout are primarily present in the mainstem McKenzie from Leaburg Oam to Tamolitch Falls and in the South Fork above and below Cougar Dam. \, Occasionally bull trout are counted moving upstream past Leaburg Dam. A previous state record bull trout (13.9 lb) was caught in Trail Bridge Reservoir in 1980, Brook trout are found in the upper mainstem below Clear Lake, in Carmen, Smith, and Trail Bridge reservoirs, and in the upper reaches of Horse Creek and the South Fork. Legal-sized hatchery rainbow trout are currently stocked in the mainstem from Hayden Bridge to Paradise Campground (RM 69,1), in the Mohawk River; in Clear Lake; in Smith, Carmen, and Trail Bridge reservoirs; and in and above Blue River and Cougar reservoirs. The mainstem below Blue River is stocked with a specially designed "planting" boat that distributes the fish fairly evenly throughout the section of the river stocked. In other areas trout are released directly into the river from trucks. Releases of rainbow in the mainstem between Hayden Bridge and Armitage Park and above Paradise Campground were discontinued in the early 1980s because of low catch rates. Rainbow trout were also previously stocked into Gate and Horse creeks. -35- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 41 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 100 ~ CUTTHROAT TROUT m RAINBOW TROUT -BULL TROUT g:c 80 <( I.) I- :::) 0 et: I- 60 C .J lii LL 0 UJ (!) 40 ~z UJ I.) et: UJ 0.. 20 o,...__... ARMITAGE PARK DAM TO ABOVE RIVER TO LEABURG DAM BLUE RIVER BLUE RIVER AVERAGE Figure 3. Species composition of wild trout creeled by anglers, McKenzie River, 1983. Production and Harvest Legal-sized rainbow trout have been stocked in the McKenzie River since 1947 (Table 10). The number released annually increased to a high of 149,000 in 1967. Since 1980 about 120,000-125,000 fish have been stocked each year. This is the largest legal-sized trout stocking program for a single water body in Oregon. An additional 164,000 legal-sized trout are stocked annually into tributaries, Clear Lake, and six reservoirs in the drainage. Prior to 1960 the trout released were a minimum of 6 in. long and averaged 8 fish/lb. Since then they have been reared to a minimum length of 8 in. and an average weight of 3 fish/lb. Thus the total pounds of fish released have almost tripled since the early 1950s even though the number of fish released has remained about the same. -36- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 42 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Table 10. Legal-sized hatchery rainbow trout released into mainstem McKenzie River, 1947-86. ) No. No, Year stocked Year stockeda 1947 5,810 1967 149,351 1948 45,686 1968 133,015 1949 117,101 1969 129,028 1950 144,226 1970 138,568 1951 123,331 1971 132,583 1952 110,089 1972 128,057 1953 90,411 1973 129,979 1954 92,212 1974 126,041 1955 91,636 1975 125,999 1956 97,845 1976 126,043 1957 92,371 1977 137,550 1958 83,952 1978 126,055 1959 73,429 1979 126,017 1960 104,360 1980 121,072 1961 113,029 1981 124,756 1962 130,845 1982 119,997 1963 122,588 1983 123,089 ' 1964 138,854 1984 122,514 )' 1965 128,753 1985 113,441 1966 134,687 1986 125,970 a Number of rainbow reieased exotudes Leaburg Pooi from 1979 to 1986, Trends in the abundance of wild trout are difficult to determine. Electrofishing data and catch records indicate that substantial numbers of wild cutthroat and rainbow are still present in the basin, but no methods have been routinely or consistently used to estimate population size or to establish a relative index of abundance. A comparison of the proportion of wild and hatchery fish in anglers' catches during the years when creel surveys were conducted indicates that the percentage of wild fish caught declined from the early 1950s to the mid-1970s. The percentage of wild fish in the catch was similar in 1974 and 1983, 11% and 10%, respectively. The extent to which the decline in catch of wild trout reflects a decline in the abundance of wild trout is uncertain. The shift from wild trout to hatchery trout in the catch could also be the result of hatchery fish being easier to catch and more available to anglers and anglers targeting on hatchery fish. Catch records of McKenzie River guides and their parties indicate that the catch per angler and the catch rate of trout less than 14 in. have ) remained fairly constant since 1948 (Table 11). This size group includes both -37- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 43 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Table 11. Trout catch and angling effort of a portion of the guided anglers on the McKenzie River, 1948-85. Reported Trout 14 in. and over guided Angler Trout under 14 in. No. Released/ Year trips Anglers hours Kept Kept/angler Fl sh/hr. released angler 1948 995 1,665 8,948 5.3 1949 1,135 1,900 11,718 6.2 1950 958 1,605 8,524 5.3 1951• 748 1,234 7,301 5.9 -- 65 0.05 1952 666 1,132 6,764 5.9 107 0.09 1953 754 1,258 7,515 5.9 337 0.26 1954 680 1,114 6,928 6.2 138 0.12 1955 685 1,176 8,295 7.0 138 0.11 1956 699 1,199 7,888 6,5 299 0.24 1957 652 1,089 6,557 6.0 249 0.22 1958 541 1,082 5,486 5.0 47 0.04 1959 213 391 2,763 2,548 6.4 0.91 74 0.18 1960 228 452 3,345 3,243 7.1 0.96 74 0.16 1961 261 483 3,496 3,094 6.4 0.88 98 0.20 1962 300 608 4,330 4,121 6.7 0.95 121 0.19 1963 348 657 4,234 5,247 7.9 1.2 79 0.12 1964 417 755 4,250 5,881 7.7 1.3 152 0.20 1965 412 760 5,025 4,617 6.0 0.91 203 0.26 1966 406 864 5,096 4,400 5.0 0.86 246 0.28 1967 380 712 4,811 4,807 6. 7 0.99 165 0.23 1968 315 581 4,086, 4,302 7.4 1.05 75 0.12 1969 95 182 1,282 1,407 7 .7 1.09 30 0.16 1970 350 678 3,876 5,156 7.6 1.33 151 0.22 1971 385 740 4,853 5,035 6.8 1.03 295 0.39 1972 391 789 5,231 5,472 6.9 1.04 228 0.28 1973 328 620 3,968 4,618 7.4 1.16 145 0.23 1974 290 572 4,043 4,113 7.1 1.01 146 0.25 1975 375 535 3,036 3,336 6.2 1.09 208 0.38 1976 264 548 3,963 3,679 6.7 0.92 200 0.36 1977 191 362 3,703 2,482 6.8 0.67 119 0.32 1978 197 401 2,865 3,308 8.2 1.15 150 0.37 1979 196 460 2,865 2,587 5.6 0.90 145 0.31 1980b 208 498 1,583 1,901 3.8 1.20 161 0,32 1981 268 510 3,202 2,046 4.0 0,63 196 0.38 1982 168C 328 2,039 1,209 3.6 0.59 158 0.48 1983 164C 321 2,300 1,145 3.5 0.49 162 0,50 1984 141 276 1,949 902 3.2 0.46 193 0.69 1985 198 440 2,234 2,014 4.5 0.90 246 0,55 a Sinae 1951 anglers have been required to release rainbow trout 14 in. ar.d "larger. b Bag Zimit r>eduaed fl'om 10 trout/day to 5 trout/day. c Trip data Lost. Trip numbers aaLaulated from 1970-1980 average of 1.95 anglers/trip. -38- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 44 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 wild and hatchery trout. The catch rates of all types of anglers sampled during creel surveys in 1973, 1974, and 1983 have not varied greatly for hatchery trout and for wild rainbow and cutthroat (Table 12). The catch and release per guided angler of wild rainbow 14 in. and longer has generally increased since the late 1960s (Table 11). Table 12. Average catch rates for hatchery rainbow, wild rainbow, and wild cutthroat trout in the McKenzie River, 1973, 1974, and 1983. Hatcheri rainbow Wild rainbow Wild cutthroat Year Fish/hr. Hr./fish Fish/hr. Hr,/fish Fish/hr. Hr./fish 1973 0.41 2.4 1974 0,31 3.3 0.027 37.0 0.016 62.5 1983 0.39 2.5 0.033 34.5 0.012 83.3 In 1983 anglers caught an estimated 4,912 wild trout and 38,153 hatchery rainbow from Armitage Park (RM 4) to Blue River (RM 53.6). The catch of hatchery fish represents 37% of the number stocked in that area. About 72% of the marked hatchery fish were caught within 2 weeks of stocking (Figure 4). ) Size and Age About three-fourths of the wild rainbow and cutthroat trout collected by electrofishing on the lower McKenzie below Hayden Bridge during 1976-78 were 4 through 8 in. (Figure 5), Legal-sized trout (rainbow 6 to 14 in. and cutthroat 6 in. and over) accounted for 74% and 59% of the cutthroat and rainbow sampled, respectively. Less than 1% of the cutthroat and 4% of the rainbow were 14 in. and larger. In 1983 most of the wild rainbow and cutthroat kept by anglers were 7 to 11 in. (Figures 6 and 7). Wild rainbow average 1 to 2 in. larger than cutthroat of the same age for fish age 2 and older (Table 13). Cutthroat sampled during the spring and summer in the McKenzie River are generally older and consequently larger than cutthroat in tributaries (Table 14). Cutthroat in the mainstem are mainly age 2 and 3 fish, whereas cutthroat in the Mohawk and other tributaries are largely age 1 and 2. Smaller tributaries also contain substantial numbers of fish less than a year-old. These size and age differences are probably related to lower water temperatures and food and space limitations in the tributaries, downstream migration of larger fish, and genetic characteristics (Nicholas 1978). -39- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 45 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 40 10 0 2 3 4 5 8 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15 16 I'!' 18 WEEK AFTER STOCKING Figure 4. Timing of catch of hatchery rainbow trout after stocking in the. McKenzie River, 1983. 25 1\ I 20 I ' I ' I \ I ' II ' \ 15 I \ LU I \ (!) I \ i:':z I \_ LU ,I. ', ~ :t' 10 I ' I \ I I /\ I RAINBOW \ I \., 5 I ' '-.,..- L ",~ ...... ,._ __....._ -..,_ __ 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 LENGTH (IN) Figure 5. Length frequencies of wild rainbow (N=632) and cutthroat (N=l,060) collected from the McKenzie River below Hayden Bridge by electrofishing, 1976-78. -40- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 46 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 120 100 80 40 20 0 5 67 8 9101112131415 LENGTH (IN) Figure 6. Length frequencies of wild rainbow trout creeled by anglers, \ McKenzie River, 1983. 40 30 10 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 LENGTH (IN) Figure 7. Length frequency of wild cutthroat creeled by anglers, McKenzie River, 1983. -41- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 47 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Table 13. Length and age of wild rainbow and cutthroat trout from the McKenzie River. Cutthroata Rainbowb Length range Length range Age (in. l Percentage ( i n. l Percentage 1 4.5-6.0 7 6.0-8.0 3 2 4.5-9.0 42 7.0-11.0 41 3 6.0-11.5 26 8.0-13.0 43 4 10.0-12.0 20 11.0-15.0 12 5 11.5-14.0 5 14.0 1 6 >16.0 1 ~ 331 fish eieatroshoaked from the mouth to Hayden Bridge in 1978. 180 fish sampted during areei survey of angters in 1983. The age at which trout mature greatly influences the ultimate size that they reach, Earlier maturing fish are generally smaller than older maturing fish since much of the energy of a mature fish is directed at development of eggs and sperm rather than body size. In the Willamette Basin, cutthroat generally mature at an earlier age and consequently smaller size than rainbow trout. No specific data on the age of maturity of cutthroat in the McKenzie system are available; however, 92% of the males and 86% of the females examined from the nearby North Fork of the Middle Fork of the Willamette River were mature at age 3 (Nicholas 1977). In contrast, most of the female rainbow trout from the North Fork mature at age 4 and older. In 1960 and 1961 an average of 94% of the wild rainbow over 14 in. sampled from the ladder at Leaburg Dam on the McKenzie were mature (0SGC, unpublished data). The lengths of these fish correspond to age 5 and older fish based on scale analysis of fish sampled during the 1983 creel survey. In 1960 and 1961, 61% and and 27%, respectively, of the rainbow less than 14 in. (age 4 and younger) taken from the Leaburg ladder were immature. Jensen (1950) also mentioned that many 12 in. rainbow (probably primarily age 4) taken from the ladder were immature. Time of Spil\llni ng Native rainbow and cutthroat trout are spring spawners. Wyatt (1959) reported cutthroat spawning in small tributaries from late March through early June, As mentioned above, mature rainbow have been taken in the Leaburg ladder from March through May. Rainbow have also been observed spawning during st.mmer steel head spawning surveys in February and March. Spawning generally occurs earlier at lower elevations. Time of spawning may be affected by water temperatures and flow patterns. The time of bull trout spawning has not been documented in the McKenzie system, but elsewhere they spawn in the fall (Wydowski and Whitney 1979). -42- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 48 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Table 14. Age of cutthroat trout captured electrofishing in the McKenzie River drainage (modified from Moring and Youker 1979). A9.e Stream No. 0 1 2 3 4 5 S McKenzie R. mainstema 558 o.o 28 301 136 72 17 4 Percentage o.o 5.0 53.9 24.4 12.9 3.0 0.7 McKenzie R. tributaries Sear Cr. 21 4 11 1 5 0 Cascade Cr. 24 14 8 2 0 0 Cassius Cr. 9 3 6 0 0 0 Elk Cr. 8 1 2 2 2 1 Finn Cr. 18 2 4 8 2 2 French Pete Cr. 2 0 2 0 0 0 Indian Cr. 8 5 1 2 0 0 N. Fk. Gate Cr. 5 0 2 3 0 0 N. Fk. N. FK. Gate Cr. 3 0 2 1 0 0 S. Fk. Gate Cr. 97 5 62 29 1 0 Osborn Cr. 11 3 4 4 0 0 Rebel Cr. 27 15 9 3 0 0 Taylor Cr. 10 3 5 2 0 0 Total 243 55 118 57 10 3 Percentage 1.6 \ 22.6 48.6 23.4 4.1 ' Mohawk drainage Drury Cr. 6 1 2 1 1 1 McGowan Cr. 20 4 13 3 0 0 Mill Cr. 93 0 70 19 4 2 Mohawk R. 3 0 1 0 0 2 Parsons Cr. 15 0 8 6 1 0 Shotgun Cr. 11 4 4 3 0 0 Total 148 9 98 32 6 3 Percentage 6.1 66.2 21.6 4.1 2.0 a Hayden Bridge to mouth. -43- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 49 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Location of Spawning Cutthroat spawn in smaller tributaries, some with flows less than 1 cfs (Wyatt 1959). However, recoveries of spawned adults suggest that cutthroat may also spawn in areas of the mainstem even though actual spawning activity has not been documented (Moring and Youker 1979). Rainbow spawn in the lower reaches of many mid-size tributaries, such as Marten, Gate, Deer, Quartz, and Horse creeks, and along the margins of the mainstem and in side channels. Move!llent and Migration Cutthroat trout in the McKenzie drainage and other portions of the Willamette Basin exhibit three life history patterns, which are related to movement: (1) isolated resident populations above impassable barriers, (2) populations which are largely resident in sections below barriers (some upstream and downstream movement may occur), (3) populations which are largely migratory (juveniles rear in small to mid-size tributaries, move downstream into the McKenzie and Willamette rivers to mature, and return to smaller tributaries to spawn) (Wyatt 1959; Aho 1977; .Nicholas 1978; Moring and Youker 1979 l. A comparison of the age composition of cutthroat in the tributaries and the mainstem provides some indirect evidence of downstream movements. Fish in tributaries are primarily age Oto 2, whereas older fish (age 2 to 6) are more predominant in the mainstem. Tagged cutthroat have been recovered as far as 18 miles from the tagging location in the McKenzie (Moring and Youker 1979). Cutthroat and rainbow trout migrate downstream past Leaburg Dam throughout the year (Zakel and Reed 1984). Movement of cutthroat was greatest in April and May and from October through December (Figure 8). Less than 10% of these fish were larger than 6 in. Peak downstream movement of wild rainbow past Leaburg Dam occurred during mid-November (Figure 9). About 85% of these fish were less than 6 in. Upstream movement of rainbow trout past Leaburg Dam peaks in April (Figure 10). The number of rainbow moving up through the ladder at the dam has annually averaged 71 fish over 14 in. and 444 fish less than 14 in. since 1970. Few cutthroat and bull trout have been observed migrating upstream past Leaburg Dam (a total of 26 cutthroat and 56 bull trout during 1970-86). -44- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 50 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 ) 1/5 ll Figure 8. Average biweekly percentage of the annual catch of wild cutthroat trout at the Leaburg downstream migrant trap, 1980-83 (modified from Zakel and Reed 1984). \ / 40 30 N•747 II.I I!) ~ 20 u~ ~ 10 Figure 9, Average biweekly percentage of the annual catch of wild rainbow trout at the Leaburg downstream migrant trap, 1980-83 (modified from Zakel and Reed 1984). ) -45- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 51 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 50 40 OVER 14" (Nc/,213) 30 J w (!) i:! ~ z I \ I \ ~ 20 I \ a. I \ I -A UNDER !4"(N=7,540) '--'\) \ 10 \ \ \ - ----.i...__~'b._--- --;,_ ---u.... o L-1.---1-_.J...--1_~~~:::i=-:::!t JAN-MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Figure 10. Timing of upstream passage of rainbow trout at Leaburg Dam, 1970-86. Most hatchery rainbow are caught in the area where they are stocked. In 1983 less than 9% of the fin-marked hatchery fish were caught 3 or more miles below the area where they were stocked (Figure 11). Very few fish moved upstream from the release area. Current Angling Regulations Since 1951 the mainstem and tributaries have been closed to taking rainbow trout 14 in. and larger. Rainbow over 20 in. are considered steelhead. The minimum length limit for all trout is 6 in. In 1980 the daily limit in streams was reduced from 10 trout to 5 trout. -46- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 52 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 90 ) 80 ::c I.) !i7o I.) \560 UJ ~50 ~ ~40 ffi a. 30 20 10 o L------,!-....!::=;i!!==~=...,.;,~==+--1=:;,?==~==+,:::~ 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 55 RELEASE MILES FROM RELEASE AREA AREA Figure 11. Location of angler catch of hatchery rainbow trout stocked in the ) McKenzie River (n = 816), 1983. '11>/',v!c'.P Guidelines _;~ 1. Production of wild trout will be emphasized. Hatchery trout will be stocked in specified areas. Guideline 2. Catch-and-release of wild trout will be actively encouraged to enhance wild trout production and angling. Hatchery trout will be 111arked to allow anglers to more easily identify and release wild trout. Infonnation on methods for properly releasing fish will be provided to the public to increase survival of fish after release. Guideline 3. Cape Cod hatchery stock will be used to minimize movement of hatchery trout out of stocked areas and to minimize interbreeding between hatchery trout and native wild trollt- Guideline 4. Trout fisheries will be 111anaged to provide a diversity of angling opportunities. ) -47- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 53 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Objectives Objective 1. Optimize the abundance and potential catch rate of wild trout (Option la of the Wild Fish Management Policy) in the mainstem of the McKenzie River frooi the mouth to Hayden Bridge. Assumptions and Rationaie 1. This is one of the most productive sections of the river for wild rainbow and cutthroat trout in terms of abundance and size of fish. 2. Anglers have indicated high interest in managing this section of the river for wild trout. 3. Hatchery trout have not been stocked below Hayden Bridge in recent years, and no trout will be stocked there. Guideline 2 of the Resident Trout section of the wiiiamette Basin Fish Management Flan (ODFW 1988) states, "Yearling trout will not be stocked in streams or sections of streams that are not currently stocked," Probiems and Recommended Actions Problem 1. Harvest and hooking mortality of wild trout in this section may reduce the potential catch rate below the optimum possible. Action 1.1 Propose angling regulations (i .e, catch-and-release of wild fish and exclusive use of flies or artificial lures with barbless hooks) that will minimize harvest and hooking mortality of wild trout. Bait angling for trout could be permitted down to approximately 300 yards below Hayden Bridge, which is a popular bank angling site. Bait angling for spring chinook and summer steelhead below Hayden Bridge could be permitted on single, barbless hooks with a gap 1/2-inch (size 1/0) or 1arger. Action 1.2 Monitor the catch rate of wild trout. Problem 2. Insufficient information is available on trends in abundance and size of wild trout. Action 2.1 Monitor the abundance and size of wild trout. Objective 2. Enhance the production and potential catch rate for wild trout and provide an early season fishery for hatchery trout by stocking about 20,000 legal-sized rainbow trout (option lb of the Wild Fish Management Policy) in the mainstm of the McKenzie River from Hayden Bridge to Leaburg Dam. -48- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 54 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Assumptions and Rationai ! 1. The public is accustomed to fishing for hatchery trout in this section, and there is considerable angling pressure early in the season. 2. Angling access is adequate for a hatchery trout fishery. 3. Angling pressure in the mainstem for hatchery trout early in the season would be dispersed from McKenzie Bridge to Hayden Bridge. 4. Stocking of hatchery trout in this section would be reduced from two releases totalling 40,000 fish to one release of approximately 20,000 fish immediately prior to the opening of the season. 5. The percentage of the first stocking of hatchery trout caught in this section has exceeded the minimum guideline of 40% [Wiltamette Basin Fish Management Plan (ODFW 1988)]. The catch for later stockings was about 21% in 1983--well below the guideline, and there is little likelihood that it will increase if angler use patterns remain the same. 6. Wild trout are considered to be less abundant in this section than below Hayden Bridge but more abundant than in the heavily stocked section from Leaburg Dam to McKenzie Bridge. 7. Reducing the number of hatchery trout stocked should enhance wild trout production and steelhead angling by reducing: (1) the impacts of interactions between hatchery fish and wild trout, (2) angling pressure on wild trout, (3) the catch of summer steelhead smolts prior to June 1, and (4) conflicts between steelhead and trout anglers. Problems and Reoommended Aotions Problem 1. Juvenile summer steelhead may compete with wild trout. Action 1.1 Encourage the harvest of nonmigrating steelhead smolts (i.e., smolts present after June 1). Action 1.2 Continue efforts to develop steelhead smolts that migrate early. Action 1.3 Release steelhead smolts at the size and time when they will migrate soon after stocking (i.e., 4-5 fish/lb and early May). See also Summer Steel head, Objective 2, Problem 1. Problem 2. Diversion of flow into Leaburg and Walterville canals reduces angling opportunity and may reduce wild trout production in adjacent sections of the mainstem. I ' -49- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 55 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Actions to address this problem are listed in the Habitat and Angling Access sections. Obj~ctive 3. Provide a fishery for hatchery trout by stocking about 125,000 legal-sized rainbow trout and maintain the production of wild trout (option le of the Wild Fish Management Policy) in the McKenzie River from Leaburg Dam to Paradise Campground, Blue River from Blue River Reservoir to Quentin Creek and the South Fork McKenzie River from Cougar Reservoir to Frisseli Campground. Assumptions and Rationaie 1. Legal-sized rainbow trout have been stocked in the McKenzie River since 1947, and 93% of the anglers surveyed in 1986 indicated that stocking should continue. 2. These three areas have been routinely stocked, and the section of the mainstem from Leaburg Dam to Blue River has been the most heavily stocked area in the past. 3. The high catch rates resulting from stocking hatchery trout attract many anglers that provide income to local businesses. 4. Current stocking levels in these areas will continue. Almost two-thirds of the anglers surveyed in 1986 felt stocking levels should remain the same. Until angler effort and catch in this section of the mainstem are evaluated, approximately 95,000 trout will be stocked annually into the mainstem, and 30,000 trout will be stocked into Blue River and the South Fork McKenzie. Up to 15,000 additional trout (1 boat stocking) may be stocked in the mainstem as part of the evaluation. Funding to produce these fish is provided by USACE. 5. A minimum catch of approximately 50,000 hatchery trout will be needed to meet the guideline in the Willamette Basin Plan (40% of the number stocked). 6. These three areas have good angling access, and flows in this section of the mainstem are suitable for angling throughout the summer. These characteristics are necessary to generate a fishery for hatchery trout with an adequate ~atch of fish stocked. Streamflow and temperature in Blue River are suitable for stocking trout from April through July. Streamflow and temperature in the South Fork are not usually suitable for stocking trout until June. 7. Numerous tributaries to the mainstem in this section and the mainstem and tributaries above this section will be managed for wild production (see Objective 4). Migration of trout produced in these areas will help maintain wild trout production in the mainstem. -50- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 56 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 8. Wild trout are considered to be least abundant in this section compared to other sections of the mainstem. Competition between hatchery and wild trout and angling pressure generated by releases of hatchery trout will continue to suppress wild trout production below its po ten ti a1. 9, Trout will continue to be stocked from the planting boat in the mainstem between Blue River and Leaburg pool to evenly distribute the fish and angling opportunity. Other areas will be stocked directly from trucks. Probtems and Reoommended Aotions Problem 1. The estimated catch of hatchery trout in this section of the mainstem in 1983 was 30% of the mnnber released rather than 40% as called for the Wiltamette Basin Fish Management Ptan (ODFW 1988). The percentages caught in Blue River and the South Fork are unknown. Action 1.1 Adjust the number of fish stocked at each planting to coincide with changes in angling pressure during the season. Action 1.2 Publicize the trout stocking schedule and river areas stocked. Action 1.3 Determine the catch:stocking ratio for hatchery trout in stocked areas. Problem 2. Increased angling pressure may increase the harvest and reduce production of wild trout. Action 2.1 Monitor the abundance, harvest, age, and size composition of wild trout. Problem 3. Use of the planting boat is time-consuming and requires considerable skill. Action 3.1 Continue to seek assistance of experienced boaters. Objective 4; Enhance production of wild trout in the main stem of the McKenzie River above Paradise Campground and in tributaries of the McKenzie River (except for stocked sections of Blue River and the South Fork) and allow a harvest of wild trout in tributaries of the McKenzie River that are currentl oen to ang 1ng option a o t e , 1sh Management Po icy. Assumptions and Rationaie 1. No hatchery trout will be stocked in these areas. Portions of this section of the mainstem and the Mohawk River have previously been stocked, However, both of these areas appear to have relatively abundant populations of wild trout. Angling access is limited by dense vegetation and high gradient on the upper mai nstem and by -51- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 57 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 private ownership along the Mohawk River. Consequently, catch of hatchery trout in these areas is low •. Hatchery trout have not been stocked above Paradise Campground in recent years. Guideline 2 of the Resident Trout section of the Willamette Basin Fish Management Plan (1988) states, "Yearling trout will not be stocked in streams or sections of streams that are not currently stocked." 2. Tributaries are important spawning and rearing areas for wild trout. Wild trout produced in tributaries consist of resident populations as well as migratory fish that also inhabit the mainstem and the Willamette River. 3. Production and catch rate of wild trout in the tributaries should not significantly decrease with the current level of harvest as long as habitat is protected and angling pressure does not increase. Problems and Reaommended Aations Problem 1. Insufficient information is available on trends in abundance, size, and harvest of wild trout. Action 1,1 Monitor the abundance, size, and harvest of wild trout. -52- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 58 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 ) (8. Hooton) SUMMER STEELHEAD Background and Status Origin SL!llmer steel head are not native to the Wi 11 amette Basin. They were first introduced into the McKenzie system in 1968. Releases in 1968 and 1969 were Siletz stock, which is suscepti b1 e to Cera·tomyxa shasta, a naturally occurring disease organism in the Willamette Basin. Few of these fish survived to return as adults. All releases since 1972 have been Skamania stock originally obtained from Washington. Skamania steelhead are resistant to c. shasta. Distribution ) Distribution of adults is influenced by the location of smolt releases. During the summer, returning adults tend to remain in the general area where -53- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 59 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 they were released as smolts before moving upriver to spawning areas during the fall and winter. Smolts have been released as far downriver as Harvest Lane (RM 8.5) and as far upriver as Belknap Bridge (RM 61). Adults have been observed throughout the mainstem up to the Carmen-Smith spawning channel at the base of Trail Bridge Dam (RM 78.5), the upstream limit of migration. Spawning ground surveys in 1982 and 1983 and other observations indicate that adults have spawned in most suitable tributaries above Leaburg Dam and in some tributaries below Leaburg Dam, particularly Trout Creek. Time of Migration and Spawning Adults begin entering the lower McKenzie in April. Some fish are caught as far upstream as Leaburg Dam in late April, when the season opens. Peak passage at Leaburg Dam usually occurs during June and July (Figure 12). In some years another surge of fish passes the dam in October or November during the first fall freshets. - 30 - ~ w ~ 4 ~ ~ ~ 20 - ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 - w 10 - ~ - ~ zw 0 - w~ ~ - 0 n n n - JAN-MAR APR JUN JUL AUG EP OCT NOV DEC Figure 12. Timing of adult summer steelhead passage at Leaburg Dam, 1970-86. -54- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 60 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Adults usually spawn in the wi 1 d during February and March, but time of spawning varies somewhat from year to year depending on water temperature. Low temperatures during December and January delay maturation. Late maturing fish wi 11 spawn in Apri 1. Hatchery broods tock are spawned at Leaburg Hatchery from mid-February through mid-March. Downstream migration of naturally produced steelhead smolts past Leaburg Dam begins in mid-April and peaks in mid-May (Figure 13). Hatchery smolts are not released until after the first week in May to avoid the intensive trout fishery during the first two weekends of the season. Smolts released earlier do not migrate immediately and, as a result, more are taken in the trout fishery. Migration of hatchery smolts past Leaburg Dam also generally peaks in mid-May (Figure 13). 80 • WILD N•2,090 --e-- HATCHERY N•9,777 60 IIJ (!) ;! z ~ 40 0:: IIJ 0. 20 0 APRIL MAY JUNE Figure 13. Average bi-weekly percentage of the annual catch of wild and hatchery summer steelhead smolts in the Leaburg downstream migrant trap, 1980-83 (data from Zakel and Reed 1984). Production and Harvest Adult steelhead are collected for broodstock at Leaburg and McKenzie hatcheries. Based on the results of studies conducted on the South Santiam River (Wade and Buchanan 1983), smolts are reared to relatively large size (4.5 to 5 fish/lb) to maximize survival. Since 1980 about 150,000 smolts have ) been released annually (Table 15) primarily in the mainstem, except in 1972-74 -55- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 61 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Table 15. Counts of adult summer steelhead at Willamette Falls and Leaburg Dam and catch and smol t rel eases of summer steel head in the McKenzie Ri.ver, 1968-86. Adult Smol ts Year Willamette Falls Leaburg Dama catchb stocked 1968 50,016C 1969 68,527C 1970 146 1 0 1971 2,310 96 0 1972 690 13 23 109,937 1973 1,686 9 24 139,600 1974 4,858 174 366 111,389 1975 2,910 236 610 107,282 1976 3,876 1,485 473 150,221 1977 9,244 834 732 125,948 1978 15,200 2,627 2,958 167,223 1979 7,600 1,500 1,406 156,453 1980 11,200 1,130 813 167 ,293 1981 15,200 1,583 2,145 151,812 1982 15,600 922 985 142,599 1983 5,301 331 350 ( 87) 126,695 1984 25,002 1,553d 2,002 (790) 156,244 1985 22,067 747e 1,460 (468) 156,842 1986 40,520 679 163,243 a Inoludes portion of the run asoending Leaburg Dam after Deoember eaoh year. b Estimated from salmon-steelhead tags; oatoh above Leaburg Dam is shown in parentheses. C Siletz stook; all other releases have been Skamania stook, d Only oounts through July 26 inoluded (oamera stolen); 874 of the fish were truoked from returns to Leaburg and MoKenzie hatoheries. e Count exoludes September 30-January 30 (oamera ma.lfunotioned); 68 of the fish were truoked from returns to Leaburg and MoKenzie hatoheries. -56- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 62 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 and in 1981-83, when some were stocked in Horse Creek and in the South Fork below Cougar Dam, respectively. In recent years most of the smolts have been released below Leaburg Dam to reduce conflicts between steelhead and trout anglers in the upper river and to reduce competition between native trout and steelhead in the upper mainstem and tributaries. In 1973 about 25% of the steelhead smolts released were caught by trout anglers. Some of these were 2-year smolts that tended to residualize. By releasing 1-year smolts and delaying the releases until the second week of May after the opening of trout season, the smolt catch was reduced to 17% of the release in 1974 (Buchanan 1975) and 7% in 1983. Naturally produced summer steelhead smolts have been captured in downstream migrant traps at Leaburg Dam and the Leaburg canal every year since 1981 (Zakel and Reed 1984). It has not been possible to estimate the total number of wild smolts produced above Leaburg Dam since the trap efficiencies may vary considerably from year to year to an unknown degree. However, the trap catches suggest that several thousand wild smolts have been produced above Leaburg Dam in some years. The number or proportion of naturally-produced adults returning to the McKenzie has not been estimated. Beginning in 1987 all returning hatchery adults will have been fin-marked, so they can more readily be distinguished from unmarked, naturally produced fish. Counts at Leaburg Dam for the past 10 years have ranged from 330 to 2,600 fish (Table 15); however, these counts are influenced by annually variable numbers of smolts released above Leaburg Dam. The number of steelhead in the lower river that do not pass Leaburg Dam is unknown. Steelhead angling has increased in popularity as the runs have increased. Most of the angler effort and catch occurs below Leaburg Dam. Catch has been primarily determined by expanding the catches reported on salmon-steel head tags or punch cards (Table 15). Si nee 1983 the catch has been reported separately for the river above and below Leaburg Dam. A statistical creel survey in 1983 indicated the catch below Leaburg Dam was less than half of the punchcard estimate (153 fish versus 350 fish). The low number of fish sampled during the survey (16 fish) may have affected the accuracy of the estimate; however, the difference between the estimates is consistent with punchcard/creel comparisons made on the North and South Santiam rivers (Buchanan et al. 1979). Current Angling Regulations The McKenzie River is open to steelhead angling during the general trout season, the fourth Saturday in April through October 31. There are no special regulations. -57- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 63 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Guidelines Guideline 1. Summer steelhead will be mnaged .for production and harvest of hatchery fish ( optfon le of the lllil d Fi sh Management Po 1i cy l. This management option will provide a sport fishery for summer steelhead while minimizing competition with naturally produced native trout and spring chinook. This guideline is also consistent with the wiiiamette Basin Fish Management PLan (ODFW 1988). Objectives Objective 1. Provide an average annual sport catch of 1,200 adult s!lllmer steelhead produced from a maximum release of 120,000 smolts. Assumptions and Rationaie 1. A popular steelhead sport fishery has developed on the McKenzie River. About 97% of the anglers surveyed on the river in 1986 indicated that the summer steelhead program should be continued. 2. Estimates from returns of salmon-steelhead tags will be used to monitor catch. These estimates are suspected of inflating the actual catch by about 1.5 to 2 times. 3. Annual releases of 120,000 smelts with a survival rate of 2% and a catch rate of 50% of the returning adults will produce an actual catch of 1,200 fish and a catch estimated from tag returns of 1,800 to 2,400 fish (actual catch times 1.5 to 2). This represents a decrease of 40,000 smelts from recent release levels and a 29% to 71% increase in the estimated average annual punchcard catch during 1977-84 (1,400 fish). Eliminating smelt releases above Leaburg Dam should increase smelt survival rates since hatchery smelts will not be harvested in the trout fishery above Leaburg Dam, and mortality from passage through the Walterville Canal will be reduced. Restricting smelt releases to the area from Leaburg Dam to the lower end of Walterville Canal will concentrate adults, which should increase the catch rate to achieve the objective. Recycling excess returns to McKenzie and Leaburg hatcheries through the fishery should also increase the catch rate. 4. Precision of the punchcard estimates will be improved (recommended in the Steelhead Plan). 5. Less than 10% of the smelts will be harvested in the trout fishery, based on the 1983 creel survey. This is considered acceptable given the popularity of the early season trout fishery. All smelts will be fin-marked, and anglers will be encouraged to release smelts during May. -58- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 64 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 6. In compliance with wiiiamette Basin Fish Management Ptan (ODFW 1988), "summer steel head smolts will be released into streams '\ that have suitable adult holding habitat throughout the summer and where adults wi 11 provide optimum recreational opportunity." During the sunmer, low flow and warm water temperatures in the Mohawk River are poor holding habitat conditions for adult fish. Angling access along the Mohawk is also limited. Probtems and Reoommended Aotions Problem 1. Late-migrating smolts are subject to increased mortality from bacterial diseases in the Willamette River. Action 1. Use adults that return to the McKenzie River for broodstock to produce smolts that are more likely to survive because of adaptations (i.e., early migration, disease resistance). Action 1.2 Smolts will be released as soon as possible in early May to encourage early migration. Problem 2, Some smolts and adults are killed or injured that migrate through the Walterville Canal and the Sullivan Plant at Willamette Falls. Actions to reduce smolt losses in the Walterville Canal are discussed in the Habitat section, Objective 1, Problem 10. Actions to improve passage at Willamette Falls are discussed in the Wittamette Basin Fish Management Ptan (ODFW 1988), Habitat sec ti on, Objective 1, Problems 1 and 2. Problem 3. Angling opportunities and harvest in 13 miles of river below Leaburg Dam are restricted by low flow from diversion of water into the Leaburg and Walterville canals. Action 3.1 Negotiate with EWES to provide adequate flow in the mainstem for angling. A study using the Instream Flow Incremental Methodology is underway to evaluate flows for angling. Problem 4. Conflicts occur between trout and steel head anglers in areas traditionally used only for trout angling. Action 4.1 Release steelhead smolts between Leaburg Dam and the lower end of Walterville canal to reduce steelhead angling pressure in trout angling areas above Leaburg Dam and below Bellinger Landing. Problem 5. Steelhead anglers crowd the areas where steelhead concentrate, particularly in the 2-mile section below Leaburg Dam. ) -59- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 65 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Action 5.1 Releases of smolts will be dispersed throughout the area between Leaburg Dam and the lower end of Walterville Canal. This should help disperse the returning adults and, consequently, the anglers. Action 5.2 Secure additional bank angling sites from Leaburg Dam to Bellinger Landing. Problem 6. The economic value of the summer steelhead program is not known. Action 6.1 Conduct a cost-benefit analysis of the summer steelhead program. Objective 2. Reduce the potential impact of Smlmer steelhead on the production of native trout and spring chinook. Assumptions and Rationale 1. Release of steelhead fry or fingerlings and natural production of summer steelhead will reduce the production of native trout and spring chinook. 2. Only smolt-sized summer steelhead will be released [WiLLamette Basin Fish Management Plan (ODFW 1988)]. 3. Adult summer steelhead tend to return to areas where they were released as smolts. 4. Most of the spawning habitat in tributaries used by both rainbow trout and summer steelhead is located above Leaburg Dam. Probtems and Reoommended Aotions Problem 1. Although the effects of competition among summer steelhead, trout, and spring chinook have not been determined, summer steelhead have been observed spawning in tributaries above Leaburg Dam at the same time and in the same locations as native trout. Wild summer steelhead smolts have also been collected in a downstream migrant trap at Leaburg Dam. Action 1.1 Release all summer steelhead smolts in the mainstem McKenzie River between Leaburg Dam and the lower end of Walterville Canal to reduce steelhead spawning and rearing above Leaburg Dam. Action 1.2 Monitor the hatchery and wild adult steelhead in the catch, the run past Leaburg Dam, and returns to Leaburg and McKenzie hatcheries. -60- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 66 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Action 1.3 Monitor emigration of wild smolts with the trap at the Leaburg canal screen. Action 1.4 Conduct periodic steelhead spawning surveys. Action 1.5 Consider trapping adults at Leaburg Dam and trucking them to downstream release sites for recycling through the fishery. Action 1.6 Work with EWEB to determine the feasibility of screening the ladders at Leaburg Dam to prevent the upstream passage of adult summer steelhead while permitting passage of trout and other species. The screens would not be installed until the adult spring chinook migration past Leaburg Dam is completed. Problem 2. Some nonmigrant smolts remain in the river and compete with native species. Action 2.1 Encourage anglers to keep adipose-clipped smolts caught after June 1. Objective 3. Develop a brood stock from adults returning to the McKenzie River to produce smolts for the McKenzie and Middle Fork Willamette subbasins. Asswnptions and Rationaie 1. Development of a local brood stock should increase the survival of summer steel head from the upper Willamette Basin. 2. Leaburg and McKenzie hatcheries do not have the capacity to rear McKenzie and Middle Fork stocks separately. 3. Some smolts will be released at McKenzie Hatchery to provide adult returns for brood stock. 4. Brood stock will be collected from May through October to maintain broad run timing [WiLLamette Basin Fish Management PLan (ODFW 1988)]. 5. Brood stock from the McKenzie River could be used for smo 1 t production needs in other Willamette subbasins should problems with brood stock collection or smolt production occur at Foster ProbLems and Reaommended Aations Problem 1. Adult returns to McKenzie and Leaburg hatcheries may occasionally exceed needs for brood stock. Action 1.1 Truck excess adults to downstream release sites for recycling through the fishery. -61- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 67 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Problem 2. Adult returns to the McKenzie River may at times be insufficient for brood stock needs. Action 2.1 When necessary, obtain broodstock from the Middle Fork Willamette River (Dexter Dam) or the South Santiam River (Foster Dam), in that order of preference. -62- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 68 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 WINTER STEELHEAD \ Background and Status Origin Winter steelhead are not considered to be native in the McKenzie River or other portions of the Willamette Basin upstream from the mouth of the Calapooia River (Dimmick and Merryfield 1945). The reasons for their absence are uncertain. Early releases of hatchery winter steelhead in the McKenzie are poorly documented. Trask stock fingerlings were released from 1911 to 1913 (Wallis 1961). This stock is not resistant to the disease organism Ceratomyxa shasta present in the Willamette Basin, and few probably survived to return as adults. Releases of marked juveniles during the late 1940s were reported, but the number released, stock, and subsequent adult returns were not indicated. Winter steelhead were established in the Middle Fork Willamette and Fall Creek following introduction of North Santiam stock in the mid-1950s. Some of the few winter steelhead identified at Leaburg Dam in the late 1950s and subsequently may have been strays from the run into the Middle Fork. Distribution Besides observations at Leaburg Dam, a few winter steelhead have been reported in the Mohawk River, and a few were caught in the lower McKenzie River in the 1950s and 60s. Production Winter steelhead do not appear to ever have been abundant in the McKenzie. Biologists and hatchery personnel mention handling winter steelhead while trapping rainbow trout at Leaburg Dam during the late 1940s, but numbers of steelhead were not documented until 1957. Counts at Leaburg Dam during mid-March through mid-May, the normal migration timing of Willamette stocks, averaged less than 5 fish per year from 1957 to 1969 prior to the introduction of summer steelhead (Table 16). Counts of winter steelhead at Leaburg Dam were discontinued in 1976, when it was determined that many of the fish passing the dam from January through May were probably summer steelhead that entered the river the previous year and were migrating upriver to spawn. -63- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 69 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Table 16. Counts·of winter steelhead at Leaburg Dam, 1957-75. (No counts are available prior to 1957. After 1975 adults passing Leaburg Dam have been classified as summer steelhead.) Winter Winter Year steel head Year steel head 1957 2 1965 6 1958 6 1966 2 1959 3 1967 2 1968 __1 a 1960 7 1969 1961 0 1962 21 1970 11 1963 3 1971 21 1964 2 1972 13 1973 3 1974 10 1975 11 a No data aolleated beoause of new ladder aonstruation. Guidelines Guideline 1. Winter stee1head ~ill not be released in the McKenzie subbasin. Objectives There are no production objectives for winter steelhead in the McKenzie subbasi n. Assumptions and Rationale 1. Current adult populations consist of only a few fish. 2. Introduced winter steelhead would compete with native trout and spring chinook. Summer steelhead probably have similar impacts; however, a popular summer steelhead fishery is established, and management strategies for summer steel head are aimed at reducing those impacts. The impacts of summer steelhead on the production of native species would be compounded by the introduction of a winter run. 3. The Mohawk River system is the most commonly considered area for introduction of winter steelhead. However, lack of public bank access along the Mohawk would substantially restrict the angling potential for winter steelhead. -64- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 70 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Probteme and Reaommended Aatione \ Problem 1. There is local interest in establishing a winter ) steelhead fishery in the area. Action 1.1 Winter steelhead management efforts in the upper Willamette Basin are being directed at enhancing the run in the Middle Fork Willamette River. ') -65- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 71 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 (NPPC) SPRING CHIIIOOI< Background and Status Origin Spring chinook salmon are native to the McKenzie subbasin. This drainage is considered the most important remaining area for potential natural production of spring chinook in the Willamette Basin (Smith and Zakel 1981). Prior to the construction of major dams on Willamette tributaries, the McKenzie River produced an estimated 40% of the run of spring chinook above Willamette Falls (Mattson 1948), and in 1959 it accounted for about 50% of the run (Willis et al. 1960). Hatchery fish have been stocked since 1902, when the river was first racked to collect adults for broodstock. Most of the early releases consisted of fry and fingerlings in poor condition. Consequently, few returning adults of hatchery origin were produced until the mid-1950s (Wallis 1961). Although eggs and fish were widely exchanged between hatcheries within the Willamette Basin prior to 1975, hatchery records indicate that only Willamette stocks have been released in the McKenzie drainage. Since 1975 adults returning to McKenzie Hatchery have been used exclusively for broodstock. However, strays from other release locations in the Willamette Basin have accounted for as much as 34% of adults collected at McKenzie Hatchery (Table 17). -66- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 72 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Table 17. Stray spring chinook recovered in the McKenzie River, 1978-85. ) Run Adults Stra,rsa year collected Number Percentage Origin 1978 1,466 497 33.9 Fall Creek, Dexter 1979 782 31 4,0 South Santiam 1980 807 61 7.6 South Santi am 1981 784 42 5.4 South Santi am, Dexter 1982 1,460 158 10,8b South Santiam, Minto, Dexter 1983 821 25 3.0 South Santi am, Dexter 1984 1,903 16 0.8 Oakridge 1985 1,923 14 0.7 Oakridge a Aatuai reaoveriee expanded to aaaount for unmarked fish in reieaee group. Sinae not aii retease groups contained marked fish, these estimates are minimat. b Potentiat bookkeeping error. Distribution After entering the McKenzie River, adults hold in the deeper holes in the mainstem and spawning tributaries prior to spawning in the fall. .Most of the fish hold between Hayden Bridge and Leaburg Dam. Adults also hold near the outfall of the Ore-Aqua hatchery below Hayden Bridge, below the rack in the Walterville canal, in the tailrace below the powerhouse in the Leaburg Canal, and below Leaburg Dam. Nonnal migration timing may be delayed at these latter sites. Spring chinook spawn and juveniles rear throughout the mainstem up to Trail Bridge Dam, in most major tributaries including Gate, Horse, and Lost creeks, and in the lower sections of the South Fork and Blue River below the dams. Juveniles have also been sampled in the lower sections of tributaries where spawning is not known to occur {Hutchison et a 1. 1966). Spring chinook were reportedly present in the Mohawk River prior to about 1910 (Parkhurst et al. 1950), and a few adults have occasionally been observed there in recent years. The Mohawk River and Camp Creek are not considered suitable for spring chinook production because they lack holding pools, water is wann during the summer, and flow is low during the spawning period. The tributaries with the greatest natural production historically are Horse and Lost creeks and the South Fork. Access to approximately 25 miles of the most productive spring chinook habitat in the subbasin has been blocked since 1962 by Cougar Dam on the South Fork, Minor losses in distribution have occurred as a result of the Blue River and Trail Bridge dams. -67- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 73 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 In 1962-64 adults were trucked and released above Cougar Dam. Release of 2,050 adults in 1962 produced an estimated 79,000 smolts in the reservoir. The program was discontinued because of difficulties in collecting adults below the dam, inefficiency of the smolt collection facilities, and high mortality of smolts passing the dam. Since 1983 fingerlings have been stocked in Blue River Reservoir to rear. Sampling conducted in 1983 and 1984 indicated that substantial numbers of these fish were growing to smolt size. In 1986 some of these smolts were found dead or injured at Leaburg Dam apparently as a result of migrating through Blue River Dam during evacuation of the reservoir (0DFW, unpublished data). The survival of smolts from Blue River Reservoir has not been estimated; however, adults were observed below Blue River Dam in 1986, the first time in recent years. Hatchery smolts are released in the mainstem from Hendricks State Park to Trail Bridge Dam, in the lower 5 miles of Horse Creek, and in the South Fork below Cougar Dam. Lost Creek is not stocked with spring chinook to allow monitoring of wild chinook production. Presmolts were released in the mainstem in 1984 and 1985. Stocking of presmolts has been discontinued until it can be evaluated. Production The number of spring chinook that enter the McKenzie River and counts at Leaburg Dam generally parallel the size of the Willamette spring chinook run above Willamette Falls. However, while the Willamette run has increased slightly since 1970, the runs into the McKenzie since 1980 have declined an average of 18% compared to 1970-79. And despite considerable improvements in hatchery programs, the average run into the McKenzie since 1980 (7,400 fish) has declined by about 57% compared to estimated average runs during 1945-60 (Figure 14) and is less than half of the number of fish handled during egg collection operations alone in 1927 and 1928. Runs during 1945-60 peaked in 1953 at about 38,000 fish. The average run into the McKenzie now accounts for less than 25% of the Willamette spring chinook run above Willamette Falls (Table 18), Although no direct measurements of the proportion of wild fish in the run have been made, evidence suggests that natural production of spring chinook in the subbasin has also declined, Since 1979 total redd counts have averaged 390 per year, less than half of the 1965-78 average of 800 redds per year (Figure 15). These counts include redds of substantial numbers of returning hatchery fish as well as any fish of wild origin and are probably inflated by counts of fall Chinook redds in the lower river (see Fall Chinook, p. 84). Counts of spring chinook entering the Carmen-Smith spawning channel below Trail Bridge Reservoir, which parallel passage counts at Leaburg Dam, have dropped from about 170 fish in the early 1960s to about 15 fish since 1979 (Figure 16). -68- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 74 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 40 0 0 s 30 ~ w N (/) 20 z :::) a:: •·"- 0 1-,-.,...,....,...,,..,....,...,.-,-,....,....,....,..,....,-,-'T""T-,-,-,-.,...... ""T"",...... ,.....-,-,.....,....,.....-,-,...... 'T""T-,-,..., 1945 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 YEAR Figure 14. Estimated run size of spring chinook in the McKenzie River, 1946-86. The factors considered primarily responsible for the decline in spring chinook production are: (1) the loss of habitat blocked by dams, principally Cougar Dam, which eliminated a run 4,000 or more adults; (2) mortality of fry and smolts in the Leaburg and Walterville canals and at Willamette Falls power generating facilities; and (3) the inability of hatcheries to compensate for losses in natural production. The habitat-related problems are discussed in greater detail in the Habitat Section. The mainstem of the McKenzie River was racked from 1902 through 1957 to collect broodstock for hatchery production. Adults were last collected at the rack in the Walterville canal in 1960 (Wallis 1961). In most years the mainstem rack was located at Hendricks Bridge. Egg takes from 1902 to 1948 were designed to collect as many eggs as possible. In the peak year, 1928, the reported egg take was 27.7 million eggs. Besides being used to produce fish for stocking in the McKenzie, eggs were shipped to various locations in Oregon and other states as well. After a major decline in the runs, adult collection was reduced to about 2-7% of the runs from 1954 through 1960 to allow escapement to spawning areas above the racks. -69- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 75 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Table 18. Components of run size estimates for McKenzie River spin9 chinook, 1970-86. Percentage Willamette Run Leabur9 Redds above Redds below Spawning Hatchery Sport of Wi11 amette Falls count year Damcounta Leaburg Dam Leabur9 Dam escapementb returns catchc Rund Falls count (X 1,000) 1970 2,991 206 278 7,027 20 525 7,572 22.l 34.2 1971 3,602 184 415 11,726 232 621 12,579 28.2 44.6 1972 1,547 87 177 4,694 301 1,125 6,120 23.4 26.2 1973 3,870 393 556 9,345 56 1,510 10,911 26.0 42.0 1974 3,717 319 689 11,745 1,022 12,767 28.7 44.5 1975 1,374 115 346 5,508 0 461 5,969 31.3 19;1 1976 1,899 194 409 5,903 396 139 6,411 28.9 22.2 1977 2,714 386 850 8,690 1,517 1,071 11,278 28.2 40.0 1978 3,058 354 599 8,232 1,464 924 10,620 22.4 47.5 1979 1,219 50 155 4,998 798 303 6,099 22.9 26.6 ....,I 1980 1,980 115 219 5,751 807 381 6,939 25.7 27.0 0 1981 1,078 95 282 4,278 784 493 5,555 18.5 30.1 I 1982 2,241 139 241 6,126 1,460 627 8,213 17 .8 46.2 1983 1,561__e 119 172 3,817 821 221 4,844 15.9 30.6 1984 137 271 1,901 618 43.5 1985 825(+52l)f 74 381 7,755 1,923 5009 10,178 29.5 34.5 1986 2,061(+394)f 170 315 6,613 1,705 5009 8,818 22.6 39.1 a Camera oount--counts suspect in certain years due to camera malfunction. b Equais Leaburg Dam aount + [(Leaburg Dam aount/redd above Leaburg Dam! (redds betow Leaburg Dam)]. c Estimated from returns of saimon-steethead punahaards. d Sum of spw,ming esaapement, hatahery returns and sport catch. e Camera stoien Juty 28; previous totai counts of 917 adutts and 31 jacks. f Fish trucked from McKenzie Hatchery to above Lea'burg Dam are in parentheseso 9 Estimated. Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 76 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 50 BELOW LEABURG DAM 40 30 20 •• 0 10 w w>- > 0 0:: :::, Cl) 30 ABOVE LEABURG DAM w ....I - 20 '~. ' ~ • • I 0:: ' w 10 0.. Cl) 0 ~-- 0 0w 40 0:: TOTAL 30 ' \ 20 .' ." V 10 .. 0 1952 55 65 70 75 80 85 53 58 YEAR Figure 15. Counts of spring chinook redds in the McKenzie River, 1952-1986. (Counts below Leaburg Dam after 1968 may be inflated by fall chinook redds.) ) -71- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 77 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 15 q CARMEN-SM/TH I SPAWNING CHANNEL I I ( X /0) I I Cf) I I ~ 10 l :::::i 6 0 <( 5 LEABURG OAM-a' , / rx1,000J V 1960 65 70 75 80 85 YEAR Figure 16. Counts of adult spring chinook salmon at Leaburg Dam and Carmen Smith spawning channel, 1958-86. Until the early 1940s as many as 11 million fry and fingerlings were released into the McKenzie River and tributaries annually. Because of poor returns from these releases, the emphasis since the 1960s has shifted to stocking larger, smolt-sized fish. As a result, the total pounds of smolts released has increased more than total number released (Figure 17). In the mid-1970s hatchery releases were decreased to reduce competition with wild fish. In the early 1980s dwindling returns of chinook and new information indicating that smolts left the river soon after release prompted increases in smolt stocking. Releases of smolts into the McKenzie River have averaged about 700,000 fish for the past five brood years. An additional 200,000 fingerlings have been stocked annually in Blue River reservoir since 1984. These fish rear in the reservoir during the summer and emigrate in the late summer and fall when the reservoir is drawn down. Adults that return to the hatchery in excess of those needed for broodstock are hauled and released in the mainstem above Leaburg Dam and in the South Fork to enhance natural production. -72- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 78 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 ) 100 0 w (/) I ?I R I < ~ ~ I w / \ •\ I , I' \ I-POUNDS RELEASED I --:, I ~ (x 1,000) I I -NUMBER RELEASED o (x 10,000) 0 ....,.-,-,....,....,....,,....,...,....,-,-.,.....,...,....,...,....,...,..,..,....,....,....,...,....,....,..., 1960 65 70 75 80 85 BROOD YEAR ) Figure 17. Juvenile spring chinook releases into the McKenzie River, all sources 1960-84 broods. In the past high mortality of adult broodstock held prior to spawning was a frequent problem. This has largely been solved through a combination of antibiotic injections and reduced densities in the holding ponds. Hatchery smolts are released in the fall and spring at about 7-12 fish/lb. The highest survivals have been achieved with spring releases of intermediate and large smolts fed antibiotics to control bacterial kidney disease. Wild Juvenile Production Most of the information available on wild juvenile spring chinook is derived from counts of downstream migrants at Leaburg Dam and Leaburg Canal. These counts have mainly defined migration timing (see Time of MigPation and Sp()L)ning). Because of widely varying efficiencies of the trap at Leaburg Dam, it has not been possible to estimate total juvenile production above Leaburg Dam (Zakel and Reed 1984). · More than 90% of the wild juveniles sampled during 1980-83 were fry. No large movements of smolt-sized fish from the upper McKenzie have been observed. Most of the fry produced in the upper drainage apparently migrate ) -73- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 79 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 to the lower McKenzie and Willamette rivers to rear prior to migrating to the ocean. Substantial numbers of both spring and fall chinook juveniles have been sampled in those areas. Harvest Spring chinook produced in the McKenzie River are harvested primarily in the ocean troll fishery off of British Columbia and in the sport fishery below Willamette Falls (Figure 18). The catch in the McKenzie River has generally declined since the 1960s and has ranged between about 200 and 600 fish since 1980 (Figure 19). Creel surveys conducted in 1974 and 1983 suggest that estimates from returns of salmon-steelhead tags may be inflated (Table 19), as is the case with summer steelhead. Table 19. Comparison of catch of adult spring chinook in the McKenzie River from creel surveys and estimates from salmon-steelhead tags, 1974 and 1983. Creel survey Tag Year estimate estimate 1974 663 1,022 1983 174 221 Only 1.4% and 0.5% of the spring chinook smolts stocked in the spring appeared in anglers' creels in 1974 and 1983, respectively. Because smolts are normally stocked while trout season is closed and they migrate shortly after release, most of the hatchery chinook smolts caught are "nonmigrators" that probably would not contribute to adult production and would compete with wild juveniles. Most wild smolts are too small (less than 6 in.) to be legally kept by anglers; however, hooking and releasing wild smolts kills some of them. The decline of wild spring chinook production in the McKenzie subbasin may be due in part to mixed hatchery and wild stock fisheries. As hatchery production increased in the McKenzie subbasin and in other parts of the Willamette Basin to compensate for loss of natural production due to dams and to rebuild declining runs, the fisheries have been managed to crop the more abundant hatchery fish. Relatively high harvest rates suitable for hatchery stocks serve to further depress the wild stocks. More than 70% of the wild Willamette spring chinook return at ages 5 and 6 (Matson 1963). Hatchery adults return mainly at age 4. Thus the wild fish are vulnerable to the ocean troll fisheries for an additional year or two. The winter gill-net season on the lower Columbia River targets on large, early migrating Willamette spring chinook to minimize the catch of steelhead and depressed upper Columbia River chinook stocks. Wild spring chinook, which are generally older and 1 arger, enter the Columbia early in the run when the gillnet season is open. Some fish bound for the McKenzie River, in particular, have appeared early in the run (Galbreath 1965). -74- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 80 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 AK BC ) WA OR& CA TROLL COLUMBIA GILLNEr COLUMBIA SPORT L WILLAMETTE SPORT U. WILLAMETTE SPORT 0 10 20 30 40 PERCENTAGE OF CATCH Figure 18. Catch distribution of McKenzie River spring chinook (estimated from recoveries of coded-wire tagged fish from 1978-81 broods; upper Willamette sport catch estimated from salmon-steelhead tags). 1,500 :c 1,000 g I <( I u I I I ~ 0 I I' 0 I z 500 I :c I u \ I \ \'' ~ 0 1960 65 70 75 80 85 RUN YEAR Figure 19. Catch of spring Chinook in the McKenzie River, 1963-84 (estimated I from returns of salmon-steelhead tags). The season was closed early in 1975. J -75- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 81 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 The sport fishery below Willamette Falls does not target on larger fish early in the run like the gill-net fishery does; however, about half of the sport harvest below Willamette Falls is 5 and 6-year-old fish, and the sport harvest is about three times the gillnet catch. Consequently, the harvest of wild spring chinook in the Willamette Falls sport fishery may be as great or greater than the harvest of wild fish in the gillnet fishery. Time of Migration and Spawning Adult Willamette spring chinook begin entering the Columbia River in early February, and peak abundance occurs in late March and April. The timing of the run past Willamette Falls and subsequent entry into the McKenzie River has been influenced by flow conditions and changes in passage facilities at the falls. Movement past the falls begins about mid-April and peaks in mid-May, when flow is dropping and water temperature increases above 50°F. Prior to completion of the new fishway in 1970, the run had essentially passed the falls by the end of May. Since 1970, passage has frequently been somewhat 1 ater. Timing of the run in the McKenzie River is monitored at Leaburg Dam. Passage usually peaks in June. A smaller pulse of fish moves above the dam during the spawning period in September (Figure 20). The difference between peak passage at Willamette Falls and at Leaburg Dam has varied between 11 and 41 days since 1970. Release of cold water from Cougar Dam has delayed entry of adults into the South Fork (Ingram and Korn 1969) and may delay adult migration in the mainstem above Leaburg Dam. The spawning period has narrowed considerably si nee the early 1900 s (Figure 21). Spawning formerly began in August and lasted as late as the third week of October. Spawning is now largely confined to September. The migration timing of wild juveniles has also changed. Fry migrated past Leaburg Dam primarily during January through March during 1980-83, generally earlier than fry migrations sampled in previous years (Figure 22). The migration of fingerlings now peaks in October and November, whereas the peaks previously occurred in January through March (Figure 23). These changes may be related to increased water temperatures from impoundment releases during incubation in the fall that accelerate fry emergence and movement. Most hatchery smolts migrate past Leaburg Dam within 3-4 days of their release in March and November (Zakel and Reed 1984). Current Angling Regulations Angling regulations for spring chinook in the McKenzie subbasin are similar to those for other upper Willamette tributaries. The mainstem and the South Fork up to Cougar Dam are open from the beginning of trout season to July 15. The season is closed after July 15 to protect spawners. Portions of Walterville and Leaburg canals and the area near the Oregon Aqua Foods hatchery outfall, and the area immediately below Leaburg Dam where adults concentrate are closed to salmon angling. -76- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 82 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 \ ) z :::) 40 a::: LL. 0 LLJ 30 10 J FMAMJ JASOND MONTH ) Figure 20. Average monthly percentage of the annual run of adult spring chinook passing Leaburg Dam, 1970-86. PEAK DATE t 1902 t 1905 I • 1906 I • 1907 t 1985 I I I I I 10 20 30 10 20 30 10 20 AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER Figure 21. Comparison of historical and recent timing of egg takes from spring chinook in the McKenzie River. -77- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 83 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 (I -CARMEN- SMITH ! ·. SPAWNING CHANNEL / \ (/963-61/1) • -SOUTH FORK of the Mc KENZIE R. ( 1959, /960) J F M A J J A s 0 MONTH Figure 22. Average monthly catch of spring chinook salmon fry (<2 in.) at four sites on the McKenzie River (Zakel and Reed 1984). z 50 0 LEABURG TRAP- ~ IN •589) Cl: (!) 40 J..·····i-75~1/!tG CANAL 2 I : __J I \ <( I ; :) I \ z 30 I : z I \ <( \ \ SOUTH FORK LL 0 \ :._,7'-McKENZIE I ,'\ \ /N•79) f- 20 z ' , t \ w k \ I u \: 'I Cl: : I w \ I Cl. 10 • I 0. I z \ I p,,-· <( ... \ _.o••• w \ I ..··· ··.. 2 0 J F M A M J J A s 0 N D MONTH Figure 23. Monthly catch of fingerling (>2 in.) spring chinook at Leaburg Canal (1948), South Fork McKenzie River (1959-60), and Leaburg trap (1980-83). -78- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 84 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Guidelines Guideline 1. The McKenzie subbasin will be managed for the production and harvest of wild and hatchery spring chinook (option lb of the Wild Fish Management Policy). To compensate for loss of production above Cougar and Blue River dams. 4,060 adults returning to McKenzie River will be produced annually from release of hatchery smolts (USACE and State of Oregon 1974). As many as possible of the remainder of the run will be naturally produced. Guideline 2. Lost Creek will be managed for the production of wild spring chinook (option la of the Wild Fish Management Policy). Guideline 3. Presmolt and fry releases in streams for STEP and other programs will be limited to experimental levels and evaluated as to their effectiveness and their impacts on other salmonids. Guideline 4. Adults that return to McKenzie Hatchery will be used for brood stock to produce hatchery fish released in the subbasin. Other Willamette stocks may be substituted when returns to the McKenzie River are insufficient for hatchery production. Objectives Objective 1. Increase the average annual run of spring chinook entering the McKenzie River to 18,000 adults. Assumptions and Rationaie 1. Spring chinook are a valuable native species that contribute to ocean and freshwater fisheries in the ,Columbia, Willamette, and McKenzie rivers. The McKenzie subbasin has historically produced a major share of the Willamette spring chinook run. 2. A run of 18,000 spring chinook into the McKenzie River would be 40% of the run-size target for Willamette spring chinook above Willamette Falls when the run entering the Columbia River is 90,000 fish or more [WiLLamette Basin Fish Management PLan (ODFW 1988), Spring Chinook, Objective 2]. Past runs into the McKenzie River were estimated to be about 40% of the runs above Willamette Falls (Mattson 1948). 3. The average estimated run of spring chinook in the McKenzie River was about 18,000 during 1945-60, prior to loss of production above Cougar, Blue River, and Trail Bridge dams. Egg take records suggest that runs before 1945 may have been larger, but the data are inadequate to estimate run sizes during those years. 4. Since the McKenzie subbasin formerly produced large numbers of chinook as well as wild trout, achievement of this objective should not reduce wild trout production. -79- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 85 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 5. Smolt releases will currently be limited to the capacity of McKenzie Hatchery--935,000 smolts. This should produce a return to the river of about 8,000 adults if recommended criteria for size and time of release are followed and disease control continues to improve. Half of the smolt production at McKenzie Hatchery is funded by USAGE to compensate for losses of natural production above Cougar and Blue River dams. The remaining half of the hatchery production is funded by ODFW to enhance the run. The number of smolts released for enhancement can be reduced if the run-size objective can be reached through natural production of more than 10,000 adults. 6. A run of 18,000 fish would be adequate for harvest, spawning escapement, and needs for hatchery broodstock (400 females and 200 males). PPobiems and Reoommended Aotions The Wiiiamette Basin Fish Management Plan {ODFW 1988) identifies the problems and recommends actions needed to solve those problems in order to achieve the objectives for spring chinook in the Willamette Basin. The following recommended actions taken from the Willamette Plan apply to achieving the run-size objective for the McKenzie subbasin: Willamette Plan, Spring Chinook, Objective 1 Action 1.1 Develop an improved program of disease prevention. Action 1.2 Continue the monitoring programs for viruses and bacterial kidney disease at hatcheries. Action 1.3 Refine programs of antibiotic treatments. Action 3.1 Monitor survival rates by annual tagging of representative groups of smolts at all hatchery facilities. Action 5.1 Determine the number and proportion of wild chinook in the existing run. Action 6.1 Apply new passage technology, as it develops, to reopening areas above dams (i.e., Cougar Dam) to spawning and rearing of spring chinook. Action 9.1 Investigate the life history characteristics of spring chinook and identify the factors limiting freshwater production, particularly the possible lack of adult holding areas. Action 9.2 Determine if hatchery fish can be used to stock underseeded habitat. -80- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 86 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Willamette Plan, Spring Chinook, Objective 2 ) Action 3.2 Transport excess adults to spawning areas where escapement is inadequate. Action 3.4 Where alternative uses are not possible, kill and sell excess adults and use proceeds to improve hatchery programs. Actions to improve passage of juveniles and adults at Willamette Falls are discussed in the Willamette Basin Fish Management Plan ( ODFW 1988) ( see Habitat section of the MoKenaie Subbasin Fish Management Plan, Objective 1, Problems 1 and 2). Recommended actions for the following habitat-related problems are discussed in the Habitat section. problem 1. Adult migration is delayed because of (1) false attractions at the outfall of Ore-Aqua hatchery, below the rack in Walterville canal, the tailrace of the Leaburg powerhouse, Leaburg Dam, and Leaburg and McKenzie hatchery outfalls; (2) reduced flow in the mainstem resulting from diversion into the Leaburg and Walterville canals; (3) temperature blocks from release of cold water from Cougar and Blue River reservoirs. Problem 2. Low flow in the mainstem adjacent to the Leaburg and Walterville canals reduces spawning and rearing habitat. Problem 3. Some spring chinook that move downstream into Leaburg and Walterville canals are injured or killed, and smolts may be injured migrating out of Blue River Reservoir. Problem 4. Increased water temperature from reservoir drawdown in the fall may accelerate fry emergence and alter juvenile migration timing. Reduced water temperature from releases of cold water from reservoirs during the summer may reduce juvenile growth rates. Problem 5. There is little spawning gravel below Cougar and Blue River dams, and the dams have eliminated future recruitment of gravel from upstream areas. Additional problems and recommended actions: Problem 6. The spawning channel below Trail Bridge Reservoir is not being used to its full potential for spring chinook production. Action 6.1 Work with EWEB to increase use of the spawning channel by adults and consider its use for rearing, acclimation, and release of some hatchery juveniles. ) -81- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 87 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Problem 7. There is no collection facility for adults returning to Blue River. Action 7.1 Include an adult collection facility or other form of mitigation in any plans for electrical generation at Blue River Dam. Problem 8. Natural production of spring chinook is low, particularly above Leaburg Dam. Action 8.1 Develop and evaluate techniques to enhance natural production of spring chinook. Problem 9. The adult return rate from hatchery releases is unknown; and, consequently, it is not certain if USACE's compensation responsibilities are being met. Action 9.1 Negotiate with USACE to evaluate the survival of hatchery smolts to returning adults. Objective 2. Provide opportunity to harvest 2,000 spring Chinook in the lllcKenzie River sport fishery. Assumptions and Rationale 1. A harvest of 2,000 fish represents 40% of the harvest objective in the Witlamette Basin Fish Management Plan (ODFW 1988) for sport fisheries above Willamette Falls and corresponds with the run-size objective for the McKenzie River--40% of the run above Willamette Falls. 2. The average annual catch from 1975 to 1984 was 518 fish. Angling effort and catch are expected to increase as the run-size increases. 3. Increasing spring chinook angling should not conflict with trout and steelhead angling. 4. Existing regulations are considered reasonable and do not appear to 1 imit the catch. 5. Adult passage at Willamette Falls will be improved. 6. Harvest of 2,000 fish will not reduce spawning escapement below the level needed for hatchery broodstock and to fully seed available habitat. Problems and Reoommended Aotions Problem 1. Some areas where salmon concentrate are closed to angling because of snagging problems. Action 1.1 Work with EWEB and Oregon Aqua Foods to discourage salmon from concentrating at their facilities. -82- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 88 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Problem 2. Many anglers are not aware of the most effective angling techniques to catch spring chi nook. ) Action 2,1 Publicize effective angling techniques and prime times for angling opportunities. Problem 3. Angling opportunities and harvest in a major fishing area below Leaburg Dam are reduced by low flows from divers.ion of water into the Leaburg and Walterville canals. Action 3.1 Negotiate with EWEB and other appropriate agencies to pro vi de adequate fl ow for spring chi nook angling. A study using the Instream Flow Incremental Methodology is underway to evaluate flows for angling. -83- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 89 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 FALL CHI NOOK Background and Status Origin Fall chinook are not native to the Willamette Basin above Willamette Falls. Tule stock fall chinook from lower Columbia River hatcheries were introduced in the McKenzie and Mohawk rivers from 1966 through 1968 (Table 20). Releases were discontinued to reduce competition with spring chinook and trout. However, releases of fall chinook have continued in the Willamette River near the mouth of the McKenzie River (Beltline Bridge, Whitely and Marshall Island landings). It is suspected that adults returning from these releases stray into the McKenzie and spawn. Distribution Spawning adults and redds have been observed in the lower McKenzie River below Hendricks Bridge (RM 20.5). Some spring chinook also spawn in that area. Time of Migration and Spawning Juveniles migrate out the Willamette River and enter the ocean during their first year. The peak movement of wild juveniles past Willamette Falls is in early June; hatchery smolts migrate out shortly after release in spring. Table 20. Fa 11 chi nook releases into the McKenzie River system, 1966-68. Rel ease Number Pounds No./ Date 1 ocati on released released pound Hatchery 5/05/66 McKenzie River 650,454 1,822 357 Cascade 2/17/67 Parsons Creek 100,000 79 1,273 Bonnevi 11 e 2/15/67 McKenzie River 912,000 560 1,200 Cascade 2/16/67 Mohawk River 1,319,600 1,100 1,200 Cascade 3/27/68 McKenzie River 128,832 704 183 Big Creek 2/20/68 McKenzie River 167,445 163 1,030 Bonneville 2/20/68 McKenzie River 167,100 162 1,030 Bonneville 3/13/68 McKenzie River 336,600 327 1,030 Bon nevi 11 e 4/05/68 McKenzie River 220,314 503 43B McKenzie 3/05/68 Mohawk River 313,200 297 1,054 Cascade 3/13/68 McKenzie River 316,080 300 1,054 Cascade 4/02/68 McKenzie River 252,000 600 420 · Cascade 4/03/68 McKenzie River 226,745 505 449 Cascade -84- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 90 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 The peak of the adult run past Willamette Falls occurs during the first half of September (Howell et al. 1985). Spawning occurs shortly thereafter. Spawning time for both fall and spring chinook in the lower Mckenzie is similar. Peak spawning of fall chinook usually occurs during the first week of October, while spring chinook peak around the third week of September. Since tule fall chinook enter the McKenzie near maturity, there is little potential for sport angling. Current Angling Regulations The McKenzie River is closed to salmon angling from July 15 through October 31 to protect maturing and spawning spring chinook. Guidelines Guideline 1. Fall chinook will not be stocked in the McKenzie std>basin. Objectives Objective 1. Minimize production of fall chinook in the McKenzie subbasin. Assumptions and Rationate 1. Fall chinook occur in the lower McKenzie River, which will be managed for the production of wild trout, spring chinook, and other native species. 2. Some fall chinook spawn in the same area and about the same time as spring chinook. Juvenile fall chinook may also compete with juvenile spring chinook and trout. 3. There is no fall chinook fishery in the McKenzie, and there is very little potential for developing one with tule stock fall Chinook. PPobtems and Reaommended Aations Problem 1. Adults produced from releases in the Willamette River may stray into the McKenzie River. Action 1,1 Oiscontinue releases of fall chinook in the Willamette River near the mouth of the McKenzie River. -85- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 91 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 COHO Background and Status Coho are not native to the Willamette River system above Willamette Falls. Wallis (1961) reported a release of about 1 million fry in the McKenzie near Vida in 1920. The early-run Columbia River stock of coho were first introduced into the Mohawk River and tributaries in 1962 and into Camp Creek in 1966. Adult returns and spawning were first recorded in 1964 (Hutchison et al. 1966). Releases were discontinued in 1976 because a self-sustaining run failed to develop. Early-run coho contribute primarily to offshore and Columbia River fisheries since they enter the Willamette system at a relatively mature stage of sexual development. Coho destined for the upper Willamette Basin pass Willamette Falls primarily during September, and peak spawning occurs from early to mid-November. The late-run Cowlitz stock, which was considered more desirable in terms of migration and spawning timing, was experimentally introduced in other Willamette subbasins but was found to contribute substantially less to Oregon fisheries. Guideline Guideline l. Coho will not be stocked in the McKenzie soobasin. Objectives There are no production objectives for coho in the McKenzie subbasin. Assumptions and Rationale 1. Most of the tributaries of the McKenzie River are considered to be poor habitat for coho. 2. Coho may compete with trout, spring chinook, and other native species. Because of this concern, in 1982 the Fish and Wildlife Commission voted not to allow the release of coho into the McKenzie, Middle Fork Willamette, Santi am, and Calapooia subbasi ns. 3. The Willamette Basin Fish Management Plan (OOFW 1988) specifies that coho releases in the Willamette Basin above Willamette Falls will be limited to experimental releases. -86- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 92 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 MOUNTAIN WHITEFISH ) Background and Status Origin Whitefish are a member of the trout and salmon family Salmonidae and are native to larger streams in the Willamette Basin. They are found throughout the McKenzie River and its largest tributaries, such as Blue River and the South Fork. They are most plentiful in the mainstem of the McKenzie River and are perhaps the most prevalent sport fish present in the subbasin. General Characteristics Mountain whitefish mature at 3 to 4 years of age and spawn in the fall and early winter. They primarily frequent riffles in the summer and pools in winter. Their diets are similar those of trout (Wydowski and Whitney 1979). Time of Migration Upstream movement past Leaburg Dam peaks from April through June (Figure 24). Only a few fish were captured in the downstream mi grant trap at Leaburg Dam throughout the year (Zakel and Reed 1984). 50 w <.!) J-MAM J J ASOND MONTH Figure 24. Average monthly percentage of whitefish passing Leaburg Dam (n = 53,591), 1970-86. -87- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 93 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Harvest Although whitefish can be caught on natural bait and flies, they are seldom sought by anglers. In 1983 whitefish accounted for less than 1% of the total catch in the McKenzie River. Current Angling Regulations Since 1983 the lower 3.5 miles of the McKenzie River below the I-5 bridge have been open for year-round angling for whitefish. However, this regulation change has resulted in more catch-and-release angling for trout than angling specifically for whitefish. There is no limit on whitefish harvest. Objectives Objective 1. Increase public awareness of the angling opportunities for whitefish. Assumptions and Rationaie 1. Population levels are adequate to support an increased sport fishery. 2. Many people are not aware of the excellent sporting and eating qualities of whitefish. P~obiems and Reoommended Aotions Problem 1. Many anglers cannot identify whitefish and do not consider them a desirable game fish. Action 1.1 Publicize information on distinguishing characteristics of whitefish and angling opportunities. -88- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 94 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 MISCELLANEOUS SPECIES Background and Status Although many people are familiar with the trout and salmon species present in the McKenzie River and its tributaries, the subbasin also supports populations of a number of other fish species {Appendix A). Some warmwater fish {largemouth bass, bluegill, and crappie) also enter the river where they have access from nearby ponds. All of the species that occur in sizeable numbers are native, and, except for white sturgeon and warmwater species, are nongame species. There are no known threatened or endangered fish species in the subbasi n. These species enrich the diversity of fish present, and, for the most part, occupy habitats not relied upon by salmon and trout. There is no indication that they compete with or consume salmonids to a significant extent. Squawfish predation on salmon and trout juveniles has been a concern in some areas. However, in 1976 and 1977 squawfish comprised only 3-4% of the fish sampled in the McKenzie River compared to 9-13% of the fish sampled in the Santiam and Willamette rivers {Buchanan et al. 1981). In that same study, salmonids accounted for only 2% of the food items found in the squawfish stomachs examined. Objectives Objective 1. Maintain viable populations of native fish species not addressed separately in this plan. A88umption8 and Rationaie 1, Habitat protection efforts will help maintain habitat for these species. 2. None of these species is at a critically low level of abundance, as far as is known. PPoblem8 and Reoommended Aotion8 Problem 1, Information on the distribution and abundance of these species is very limited. Action 1.1 Encourage the compilation of existing information and additional periodic surveys of abundance and distribution. -89- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 95 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 (P. Howell) ANGLING ACCESS Background and Status Although bank anglers accounted for more than two-thirds of the anglers surveyed in 1983, the McKenzie River is more accessible to boat anglers. The shoreline is heavily vegetated, and the stable flow remains at nearly bankfull levels. Most of the property adjoining the mainstem below Blue River (RM 53) is privately owned. Bank angling access to this section of the river is limited mainly to state and county road right of ways, two state parks, one county park, and a boat ramp site provided by EWEB. The State Land Board has classified the McKenzie River as ''navigable'' below Dutch Henry Rock [immediately above Greenwood Drive boat landing (RM 33)], based on historical use of that section of the river for log drives. That decision means that the streambanks below the ordinary high water mark are publicly owned and can be used for public angling. However, the area below the high water mark along most of the McKenzie in the "navigable" section is narrow in most cases, and there are few corridors through the surrounding private lands to reach the public portion of the streambanks. -90- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 96 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 The principal tributaries below Blue River where bank angling occurs are Gate, Camp, and Quartz creeks and the Mohawk River. The property along these ) streams, like the .lower mainstem, is mo~tly privately owned •. Other tributaries between Camp and Gate creeks are too small to provide much fishing opportunity. · · Angl er/1 andowner c:onfl icts primarily involve trespass, littering, and damage to vegetation. · Incentives need to bfl deyel oped to encourage private · landowners to allow public access and to encourage anglers to respect property rights. · · · . . . . : Most of the mainstem and tributaries above Blue River are within the .Willamette National Forest{Figure 25) .and accessible to anglers. The larger tributaries, such as Blue River, the South Fork, Lost Creek and Horse Creek are located in this portion of the subbasin. However, bank angling is commonly complicated by dense shoreline vegetation. The USFS maintains a hiking trail that provides access to the river from the McKenzie Ranger Station (approximately RM 65) up to Fish Lake, a distance of about 23 miles. Boat anglers primarily use the ri\ler below Belnap Bridge (RM 61). Above that point the gradient increases cons; derably, and river use consists largely of whitewater boating. Motorboat use is prohibited upstream from Goodpasture Bridge ( RM 37). Guidelines Guideline 1. ODFW will seek to provide access for boat and bank angling that will satisfy public need for a variety of angling opportunities and a dispersion of angling effort throughout the subbasin. Guideline 2. Acquisition and development of angler access sites will be consistent with guidelines and objectives for management of fish species and habitat. Objectives Objective 1. Maintain pennanent access for boat anglers at an average of 1 access site per 2-3 miles of the mainstem upstream to Ollalie Campground. Assumptions and Rationaie 1. Existing access sites (Figure 25) meet the objective, except for the section below Hayden Bridge (RM 11.4). 2. Boat anglers primarily use the river for day-trips Consequently, access sites need to be relatively close together. ) 3. Approximately 70% of the boaters on the river are not anglers. -91- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 97 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 10123456 S ...... j F- F-11 I SCALE IN MILES @ ACCESS SITE C WILDERNESS AREAS [] NATIONAL FOREST LANDS 126 ~ BLM LANDS BOAT ACCESS AREAS l, Armitage State Park Ram~ rnM ~.Ol 21. McMullln Slide Figure 25. Boat landings and bank angling access areas in the McKenzie subbasin. -92- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 98 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Probtems and Recommended Actions Problem 1. Continued public use of several popular boat access sites on private land is not assured. Action 1.1 Purchase or secure long-term agreements for the old EWEB water intake, Dot's Landing, Rosboro Bridge, and Finn Rock Landing. Problem 2. Several boat access sites on public land above Blue River need further development. Action 2.1 Work with the USFS and the Oregon Department of Transportation to improve access sites above Blue River. Problem 3. Additional boat access sites are needed near the mouth of the McKenzie River and approximately midway between Hayden Bridge and Armitage Park. Action 3.1 Acquire and develop boat access sites at the above locations. Problem 4. Parking areas are inadequate at srnne boat access sites (e.g., Deadmond's Ferry, Bellinger Landing, Emmerich Landing, Deerhorn Road Landing, Rennie Landing, and Finn Rock Landing). Action 4.1 Encourage expansion of parking areas where needed and feasible. Problem 5. Many boat access sites are poorly maintained (e.g., litter, toilets). Action 5.1 Encourage responsible agencies to improve maintenance of publicly controlled sites. Action 5.2 Work with the media and angler groups to increase user awareness of the problem, to conduct periodic cleanups, etc. Problem 6. Boat angling opportunities are substantially reduced in the 13 mile reach below Leaburg Dam where flow is diverted into the Leaburg and Walterville canals. Action 6.1 Negotiate with EWEB and other appropriate agencies to provide adequate flow for angling. A study using the Instream Flow Incremental Methodology is underway to evaluate flows for angling. -93- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 99 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Objective 2. Increase bank angling access, especially from the mouth upstream to Blue River. ( Assumptions and Rationaie 1. Al though bank anglers account for the largest proportion of the angling pressure, below Blue River they are limited to relatively few public access sites. 2, Most of the shoreline below Blue River is privately owned. 3, Other than a few large timber companies, private landowners typically attempt to prevent public access on their property. 4. Additional bank angling access would reduce crowding and increase angling opportunities. PPobtems and Recommended Actions Problem 1. Bank angling access is inadequate below Blue River. Action 1.1 Identify potential sites. Action 1.2 Acquire additional sites for bank angling. Problem 2. Funds are generally lacking to purchase sites. Action 2. 1 Secure access agreements with private landowners. ( Action 2.2 Work with angler groups to encourage donations of funds or access sites~ Problem 3. Excessive crowding frequently occurs from Greenwood Drive boat ramp to Leaburg Dam. Action 3.1 Release of steelhead throughout the section from Leaburg Dam to the lower end of Walterville Canal, as recommended in the summer steelhead section, should help disperse returning adult fish and angling pressure, Action 3.2 Secure additional bank angling sites from Leaburg Dam to Bellinger Landing. Problem 4. There are few bank angling sites readily accessible to physically handicapped people. Action 4.1 Develop additional angling access sites designed for handicapped anglers (e.g., Leaburg pool). ( -94- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 100 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 REFERENCES Aho, R.S. 1977. A population study of the cutthroat trout in an unshaded and shaded section of stream. M.S. Thesis. Oregon State University, Corvallis. Black, H., and J.W. Thomas. 1978. Forest and range wildlife habitat management: ecological principles and management systems. Pages 47-55 in Proceedings of the workshop on nongame bird habitat management in the coniferous forests of the western United States. General Technical Report PNW-64. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. Bottom, D.L., P.J. Howell, and J.D. Rodgers. 1985. The effects· of stream alterations on salmon and trout habitat in Oregon. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Portland. Buchanan, D.V. 1975. Willamette River Steelhead. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Fish Research Project 03-5-208-00034, Annual Closing Report, Portland, Oregon, USA. Buchanan, D.V., R.M. Hooton, and J.R. Moring. 1981. Northern squawfish ( Ptyahoaheiius oPegonensis) predation on juvenile salmonids in sections of the Willamette River basin, Oregon. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 38:360-364. Buchanan, D.V., R.M. Hooton, M.G. Wade, and J.E. Mccrae. 1979. Willamette River steelhead. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Fish Research Project 88E25045, Annual Report, Corvallis, Oregon. Carleson, D., and L. Wilson. 1985. Report of the riparian habitat technical task force. Oregon Department of Forestry and Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Salem. Dimmick, R.E., and F. Merryfield. 1945. The fishes of the Willamette River system in relation to pollution. Engineering Experimental Station, Bulletin 20, Oregon State College, Corvallis. Franklin, J.F., and C.T. Dyrness. 1973. Natural vegetation of Oregon and Washington. U.S. Forest Service, General Technical Report PNW-8, Portland, Oregon. Friday, J., and S.J. Miller. 1984. Statistical summaries of streamflow data in Oregon, Volume 2. Western Oregon. U.S. Geological Survey, Open-File Report 84-454, Portland, Oregon. Galbreath, J.L. 1965. Timing of Willamette River spring chinook salmon through the lower Columbia River spring chinook salmon through the lower Columbia River. Fish Commission of Oregon Research Briefs 11:29-41. Hawkins, C.P., and J.R. Sedell. 1981. Longitudinal and seasonal changes in functional organization of macroinvertebrate communities in four Oregon streams. Ecology 62(2):387-397. -95- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 101 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Howell, P., K. Jones, D. Scarnecchia, L. LaVoy, W. Kendra, and D. Ortmann. 1985. Stock Assessment of Columbia River Anadromous Salmonids. ( Bonneville Power Administration, Project No. DE-AI79-84BP12737, Portland, Oregon. Hutchison, J. 1983. Effects of Leaburg and Wal tervi 11 e power canals upon adjacent sections of the McKenzie River. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Information Reports (Fish) 83-4, Portland. Hutchison, J.M., K.E. Thompson, and J.D. Jr. Fortune. 1966. The fish and wildlife resources of the upper Willamette Basin, Oregon and their water requirements. Oregon State Game Commission, Progress Report, Portland. Hydrology Subcommittee. 1963. River mile index Willamette River. Columbia Basin Inter-Agency Committee, June 1963. Ingram, P.E., and L.N. Korn. 1969. Evaluation of fish passage facilities at Cougar Dam on the South Fork McKenzie River in Oregon. Final Report to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Portland District. Fish Commission of Oregon, Clackamas. Mattson, C.R. 1948. Spawning ground studies of Willamette River spring chinook. Fish Commission of Oregon Research Briefs, 1(2):21-32. Mattson, C.R. 1963. An investigation of adult spring chinook salmon of the Willamette River system. Fish Commission of Oregon, Portland. McKee, A., G.M. Stonedahl, J.F. Franklin, and F.J. Swanson. 1987. Research ( publications of the H.J. Andrews experimental forest, Cascade Range, Oregon, 1948 to 1986. U.S. Forest Service, General Technical Report PNW-GTR-2O1, Portland, Oregon. Means, J.E., 1981. Development history of dry coniferous forests in the central western Cascade Range of Oregon. Pages 142-158 in Proceedings of a Symposium, Forest Succession and Stand Development Research in the Northwest, Corvallis. Moring, J.R. 1976. Catchable rainbow trout evaluation. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Fish Research Project F-94-R, Federal Aid Progress Reports, Portland. Moring, J.R., and R.L. Youker. 1979. Oregon rainbow and cutthroat trout evaluation. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Fish Research Project F-94-4, Federal Aid Progress Report, Portland. Morrison, P.H., and F.J. Swanson. Undated. Fire history in two forest ecosystems of the central western Cascade Range, Oregon. Unpublished manuscript. Morse, T.E., R.P. Hansen, and O.L. Mueller. 1987. Willamette system temperature control study. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, WSTCS Phase I Study Report, Portland, Oregon. ( -96- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 102 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Nicholas, J.W. 1977. The feasibility of a consumptive wild trout sport fishery on the North Fork of the Middle Fork of the Willamette River. M.S. Thesis, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Nicholas, J,W. 1978. A review of literature and unpublished information on cutthroat trout ( Salmo alaPki alaPki) of the Willamette Watershed. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Information Reports (Fish) 78-1, Portland, Northwest Power Planning Council. 1984, Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program. Northwest Power Planning Council, Portland, Oregon. (ODFW) Oregon Department of Fish And Wildlife. 1988. Willamette Basin Fish Management Plan. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Portland. Parkhurst, Z.E. 1950, Survey of the Columbia River and its tributaries. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Special Scientific Report, Washington, D.C. Perron Partnership P,C, 1974a. Cougar Lake, South Fork McKenzie River, Oregon, Master Plan. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Memorandum Number 18, Portland, Oregon. Perron Partnership P.C. 1974b, Blue River Lake, Blue River, Oregon, Master Plan. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Design Memorandum Number 17, Portland, Oregon. Skeesick, D,G., and K.S. Stewart. 1982, Fish habitat management on the Willamette National Forest, draft. U.S. Forest Service, Eugene, Oregon. Smith, E.M., R.H. Williams, and J.C. Zakel. 1982. Willamette River Salmon Studies. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Fish Research Projects 14-16-0001-80-445, DACW 57-49-C-4163, and DACW-57-74-C-0192, Annual Progress Report, Portland, Oregon, USA. Smith, E.M., and J.C. Zakel, 1981. Willamette River Spring Chinook Evaluation. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Fish Research Projects 14-16-0001-80-445, 81-ABH-00031, DACW 57-49-C-4163, and DACW 57-74-C-0192, Annual Progress Report, Portland. Steward, G.H. 1986. Population dynamics of a montane conifer forest, western Cascade Range, Oregon, USA. Ecology 67:534-544. Swanston, D.N., and F.J. Swanson. 1976. Timber harvesting, mass erosion and steepland forest geomorphology in the Pacific Northwest. Pages 199-219 in D.R. Coates, editor. Geology and Engineering. Dowden, Hutchison and Ross, Inc., Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania. (SWRB) State Water Resources Board. 1961. Upper Willamette River Basin. State Water Resources Board, Salem, Oregon. (SWRB) State Water Resources Board, 1964. Upper McKenzie River Basin Program, April 3, 1964, Salem, Oregon. -97- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 103 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 (SWRB) State Water Resources Board. 1985. Upper Willamette River Basin Program, May 30, 1985, Salem, Oregon. ( Thomas, B.R., J.A. Pomerening, and G.H. Simonson. 1969. Reconnaissance soil survey of the Willamette Basin, Oregon, Segment III: Uplands outside national forests. Special Report 269, March 1969, Agricultural Experiment Station, Oregon State University, Corvallis. (USACE) U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and State of Oregon. 1974. Exhibit C Agreement between the United States of America and the State of Oregon Fish Commission McKenzie River Salmon Hatchery, Cougar Lake Project, Oregon. (USFS) U.S. Forest Service. 1977. Final Environmental Statement, Willamette National Forest. U.S. Forest Service, Portland, Oregon. Wade, M.G., and D.V. Buchanan. 1983. Development and assessment of steelhead in the Willamette River basin. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Progress Report, Corvallis. Willis, R.A., F.G. Bryant, and R.S. Nielson. 1960. Environmental Survey Report pertaining to salmon and steelhead in certain rivers of eastern Oregon and the Willamette River and its tributaries, Part II, Fish Commission of Oregon, Clackamas. Wallis, J. 1961. An evaluation of the McKenzie River Salmon Hatchery. Fish Commission of Oregon, Clackamas. ( Wyatt, B, 1959. Observations on the movements and reproduction of the Cascade form of cutthroat trout. M.S. Thesis. Oregon State College, Corvallis. Wydowski, R.s. 1977. Relation of hooking mortality and sublethal hooking stress to quality fishery management. Pages 43-87 in R,A. Barnhart and T.D. Roelofs, editors, National Symposium on Catch and Release Fishing. Wydowski, R.S., and R.R. Whitney. 1979. Inland fishes of Washington. University of Washington Press, Seattle. Zakel, J.C., and D.W. Reed. 1984; Downstream migration of fish at Leaburg Dam, McKenzie River, Oregon 1980 to 1983. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Information Reports (Fish) 84-13, Portland, Oregon. ( -98- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 104 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Appendix 1. Fish species occurring in the McKenzie subbasin. (Compiled by Carl E. Bond and ODFW.) Common name Scientific name Lampreys Family Petromyzontidae Pacific brook lamprey Lampetra paaifiaa Western brook lamprey Lampetra riohardsoni Pacific 1amprey Lampetra tridentata Minnows Family Cyprinidae Chiselmouth Aorooheilus alutaoeus Peamouth Mylooheilus oaurinus Northern squawfish Ptyohoaeilus oregonensis Longnose dace Rhiniohthys aataraota Speckled dace Rhiniohthys osoulus Redside shiner Riahardsonius balteatus Sculpins Family Cotti dae Paiute sculpin Cottus beldingi Shorthead sculpin Cottus aonfusus Reticulate sculpin Cottus perplexus Stickleback Family Gasterosteidae Threespine stickleback Gasterosteus aauleatus Sturgeons Family Aci penseri dae White sturgeon Aaipenser transmontonus Suckers Family Catostomidae Largescal e sucker Catostomus maarooheilus Sunfishes Family Centrarchidae *Bluegill Lepomis maaroahirus *Largemouth bass Mioropterus salmoides *White crappie Pomoxis annularis Trouts Family Salmonidae Coho salmon Onaorhynahus kisutah Chinook salmon Onaorhyahus tshawytsaha Mountain whitefish Prosopium williamsoni Cutthroat trout Salmo alarki Rainbow trout (resident and steelhead)* Salmo gairdneri Bull trout Salvelinus aonfluentus *Brook trout Salvelinus fontinalis *Introduced -99- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 105 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Appendix 2 MCKENZIE RIVER ANGLER OPINION SURVEY INTRODUCTION In 1986, 822 McKenzie River anglers were surveyed to determine their preferences for management of the river's fish resources. Anglers were contacted by personnel of the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Department over the entire length of the river throughout the April 26 - October 31 trout season. Those areas receiving heaviest angler use were emphasized. Surveys were conducted approximately one day a week, usually a Saturday or Sunday. The opinion questionnaire (Appendix A) was developed by Department biologists with the assistance of an Oregon State University statistician and a specialist from the Oregon Parks and Recreation Division. A concerted effort was made to eliminate possible bias in the questions asked. Although the survey was not designed for statistical analysis, the number of questionnaires completed should amply represent opinions of McKenzie River anglers. RESULTS ( Major results of the survey are discussed below. Appendixes 8, C, and D contain detailed summaries of the data Collected. Since all Of the ang1ers surveyed did not respond to all the questions, the percentages given are based on the total number of responses to the questions ·rather than the total number of anglers surveyed. Type of angler. Similar numbers of boat and bank anglers were contacted. About half (52% J were fishing for trout, 25% for steelhead or salmon · and the remaining 23% for a combination of the above. Place of residence. Most anglers (71%) resided in the Eugene/Springfield area, 8% elsewhere in the McKenzie Valley and 21% outside the local area. Of the 822 anglers contacted, 65 were from 13 other states and none from other countries. Angling methods. The angling methods reported were 31% bait, 12% flies, 11% lures and 46% a combination of those methods. Bank anglers used bait more, and flies much less, than did boat anolers. Salmon/Steel head anglers seldom used flies. • Angling frequency. The interviewers felt strongly that some bf the more active anglers overestimated their number of visits to the river. Several anglers claimed to fish more days than exist in the trout season. It ( -100- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 106 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 was obvious, however, that while many (especially visitors) fished on the river fewer than five times per year, many also fished ten or more times. Salmon/steelhead anglers averaged more trips than did trout anglers. Angling experience. Most anglers rated trout fishing as "fair" or "good"; only 4% considered trout fishing to be "poor." Similarly, most fishermen thought steelhead fishing to be fair to good, while 11% rated it poor. Salmon angling was given a fair classification by the majority of people. Number of rainbow stocked. Nearly two-thirds of the anglers favored the current stocking rate, and 29% wanted an increase. Fewer than 8% supported less or no trout stocking. Rainbow stocking areas. About three-quarters of the respondents supported continued release of hatchery rainbow in the river area presently stocked. The remaining anglers had widely divergent views about which river sec tions should receive hatchery rainbow. Bait use. Slightly over half of the anglers favored continued use of bait. Only 11% wanted total banning of bait, and 36% suggested banning bait in certain river areas or where release of all wild trout was also required. Other angling regulations. Receiving about equal support were ( l) continuation of existing regulations and (2) required release of all wild trout caught. Nearly half of the surveyed anglers favored keeping hatchery trout and releasing all wild trout. That option got strongest support from fly and boat anglers. Most persons favoring release of wild trout suggested that such a regulation apply to the entire river rather than to a portion of it. Steelhead stocking. A large majority of anglers said that summer steelhead stocking should be continued. No particular river section was favored for stocking. Fly fishermen displayed a considerably higher rate of opposition to steelhead stocking than did persons using other angling methods. Recreational use. About 70% of those surveyed felt that use of the river by anglers and nonangling boaters (mainly rafts and kayaks) is presently acceptable. Another 24% thought that such uses are too heavy now. Salmon/ steel head anglers, in particular, had concerns over crowded fishing con ditions. Relatively few respondents supported greater use of the river by anglers or recreational boaters. -101- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 107 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 OREGON APPENDIX A fish & Wild Iii• MCKENZIE RIVER ANG,ER OPINION SURVEY, 1986 Background (please read before filling-out blanks below). The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife is gathering information for a McKenzie River fish management p 1an. Ang 1er opinions and suggestions wi 11 be used in developing that plan. You can help by providing answers to this opinion questionnaire. McKenzie River anglers can now legally keep a mix of wild and hatchery trout. Since 1949 the river has been stocked with an average of 120,000 catchable sized (B-12 inches) hatchery rainbow each year. This is a greater number of hatchery trout than released in any other Oregon river. Between 40 and 50 percent of trout stocked in the McKenzie River are caught by anglers; those not caught seldom survive overwinter. Trout are presently stocked in the 55 mile river section from Hayden Bridge to Paradise Campground. Increased fishing pressure associated with heavy stocking of hatchery rainbow has reduced - but does not threaten to eliminate - populations of wild trout in the 55 mile stocked section. Numbers of wild rainbow and cutthroat in the McKenzie River upstream and downstream from the stocked area appear to remain near historic levels. In 1986 all hatchery rainbow released in the river are marked with a ventral fin clip. This enables easy identification of wild (unmarked) trout2 so that anglers can voluntarily release wild trout if they choose to do so. ~: Angling Today Mainly for: Where do you live? Trout McKenzie Valley .salmon or steelhead Eugene/Springfield area Both of above Elsewhere in Oregon Angling Method Used Today: Other state (name) ------Bait Other country (name) ------Flies Lures combination of above ___ l. About how many times do you fish in the McKenzie River each year? 2. How would you rate fishing in the river in recent years? For trout: Good --; Fair --; Poor --; No opinion __ • - For salmon: Good --; Fair --; Poor --; No opinion -- For steel head: Good --; Fair Poor --; No opinion - Reasons why: 3. Do you think numbers of rainbow stocked in the McKenzie RiVer annually should be ( Increased --- Decreased --- Remain simil.ar --- Be stopped completely ___? (Please complete reverse side) -102- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 108 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 APPENDIX A (continued) 4. What river area1 if any, do you think should be stocked with rainbow? None --- Same area as present --- Other area ____ Suggested other area: 5. Studies on several rivers show that up to half of all trout caught and released by anglers using bait will die~ This is a rate about ten times higher than deaths caused by lures or flies. Should the use of bait be prohibited on the McKenzie River? Yes ____ No ____, Only if re 1 ease of wild trout is a 1 so re qui red ____ Only in a portion of the river ---- Which portion? ______6. In the future~ which of the following trout angling regulation options for McKenzie River would you most prefer? - Release all trout caught: ___; - Keep only fin-clipped hatchery trout and release all wild trout: ___; - Don't change existing regulations: ___; - Other suggestion? ______ 7. In which river area should your preferred option (from Question 6) apply? Entire-river ---- A portion of the r1ve~ ----; Which µor- tion? ------8. Surrrner-run steelhead were first introduced into the McKenzie River in 1969. Since that time, they have been stocked in the river each yearo Should this stocking of stee1head in the river be? Continued ___; Discontinued ___, Confined to a certain portion of the.river ___, Which portion? _____ 9. How do you feel about the number of anglers presently using the McKenzie River? Present use acceptable____ More use acceptable ____ Too many anglers now ____ No opinion ____ 10. How do you feel about the number of nonangler boaters {e.g. rafts and kayaks) presently using the river? Present use acceptable ---- More use acceptable ____ Too many nonangler boaters now ____ No opinion ____ 11. Do you hiive any other suggestions regarding McKenzie River fish management? Thanks for your help and Oregon Dept of Fish and Wildlife patience in filling-out 3150 East Main Street this questionnaire. Springfield, Oregon 97478 -103- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 109 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Appendix c. Results of 1986 McKenzie River angler opinion survey by ijngling method. ANGLING METHOD SURVEY QUESTION AU. DlllT FLJF.S J.IJIIES CONDI.- M£Tt100S NATION LOCATION OF RESIDENCE: HCXENZIE VALLEY 7.7\ 9.7'\ 6.2' 11.2, s.0, EUGENE/SPRINGFIELD 71.4\ 70.3\ 60.8\ 71.9\ 74.8\ OUTSIDE LOCAL AREA 20,9\ 20, l\ 33,0\ 16,9\ 19.4\ SPECIES FISHING FOR1 TROU'l' 51,8\ 61.8\ 76.3\ 39,3\ 41.6\ SALMON OR STEEL.ttEAD 25.2\ 25.9\ 2,1\ 42.7\ 26,5\ 23.0\ 12.4' 21.6\ 18.0\ 31.8\ ANGLING METUODt ""'" BAIT 31.S\ 100.0, FLIES 11.a, 100.0, LURES 10.8, 100.0, COMBINATION 45.9\ 100.0, Q1 TIMES FISHED; 0 0.9\ 0,4\ t.1\ 0,0\ 1.4\ 1-5 27,5\ 28.8\ 30,0\ 32.9\ 24,7\ 6-10 16,6\ 16,8\ 13,3\ 21.s, 16.1\ 11-25 26.8\ 25.7\ 32,2\ 20.3\ 27.6\ 26-50 18,4\ 16,8\ 11.1, 20,3\ 21,0\ 51-100 7 .9\ 10.2, 12,2\ 5,1\ 6,0\ MORE TRAN 100 1,9\ 1,3\ 0,0\ o.o, 3,2\ Q2 RATE FISHING: TROUT GOOD 59.9\ 59,2\ 66,3\ 52,7\ 60,S\ TROU'l' FAIR 36,4\ 36.0\ 30, 1\ 43,2\ 36,7\ TROUT POOR 3,7\ 4.8\ 3,6\ 4,1\ 2,8\ SALMON GOOD 15,8\ 14,3\ 13.3'1. 22.0, 15.611 SALMON FAIR 57.S\ 61.9\ 63,3\ 56.1\ 54,2\ SALHON POOR 26,8\ 23,8\ 23.3\ 22.0, 30,2\ STEE1Jf£AO GOOO 37,7' 42.9\ 35,6\ 40,4\ 34,1\ STEELUE1\.0 ••AIR 50,9\ 50,1$'\ s~.v" 41.l.1\ 50,7\ STEELUEIID POOR 11,4\ 6,3\ IJ,9'e. 11,S'l 14,7\ Q3 RAINllOW STOCKING, INCREASE 29.• _o, 31,5\ 19,4\ 23~9\ 31,1\ DECREAS& 5,1\ 4.0\ 7,5\ 3,4\ 5.6, REMAIN THE SAME 63.8\ 63,3\ 65,6\ 7.0.S\ 61,9\ STOP c;oM.PLS'l"SLY 2,1\ 1.2, 1.s, 2.3\ 1,4~ Q41.UA'XQS'TOCXRBl SAME AS PRESENT 84,5\ 88, 1\ 73,8'\ 95, 1\ 82,0'\ AREA 1 • 4,8\ 3,0\ 6,3\ 2,5\ 6,3\ AMA 2 • 2,3\ 2,1\ 2.51. 1,2\ 2,7\. ( AREA 3 • 2,2'\ 1,3'1. 6,3'\ 0.01. 2,4'\ AREA 4 • 3.4'\ 3,8\ 6,3\ o.o, 3,3\ AREA 5 •· 2.1, 1,7\ s.o, 1.2, 3,3\ QS PROHIBIT BAITr YES 10,9\ 3,.3\ 23,0\ 17,5\ 10. 7'\ NO s2.1, 10.0, 13,1\ 38,1\ 56,8\ PROHIBIT IF RELEASE WILD 13,7\ 11,1\ 15,6\ 18.6\ 13,8\ NO BAIT IN AREA 1 3.3\ 1 .. 9, 9,0\ 2. 1\ 2,9\ NO llllT IN AREA 2 3.6\ 2.2, 8,2\ 3,1\ 3.1' NO BAI'l' IN. AREA 3 7,6\ 5,9\ 14,8\ 9.3\ 6,0_\ NO BAIT IN AREA 4 8, 1\ 5,6\ 16,4'\ 10,3\ 6,8\ NO BAIT IN AREA 5 0,1\ 0,0\ o.o, 1 .o., o.o, Q6 ANGLING REGULATIONS: RZLEASE ALL TROtlT 2.9\ 0,8\ 4 .. S\ 4,7\ 3_,6\ XEQ HA'tCHERJ' ANO REI,E,ASE WILO 46,9\ 40,2\ 12.1, 41,2\ 46,4\ OON'T CHANGE 50.2\ 59,0\ 22,7\ 54, 1' 50.·o, ll7 PRE.FERREO CATCH .Q RELEASE AREAi ENTIRE RIVER 67,1,\ 66.1\ 66,7\ 75,0\ 64.9\ AREA1 4.4\ 5,1'\ 6,2\ 2,5\ 3,7\ AREA 2 4.6\ 6,8\ 4,9\ 2.s, 3.7, AREA 3 11.s, 11,0\ 9,9\ 10,0\ 13,3\ AREA 4 12.4\ 11,0'l 12.3\ 10.0, 14,4\ AREAS o,o, o.o, 0,0\ o.o, 0,0\ QS STEELHEAO S'l'OCXING: CONTINUE 87,7\ 89. t\ 78,9'\ 95,2\ 87,4\ DISCONTINUE 2,6\ 1.2, 10,5\ 2,4\ 1,6\ CONFINE STOCKING TO AREA 1 2,6\ 2,7\ 4,2\ o.o, 2.1i CONFINE. S1'0CXING TO AREA 2 2,6\ 2.1, 4,2\ o.o, 2,7\ CONFINE STOClCING TO AREA 3 2.4\ 2,3\ 1,1\ 1,2\ 3.0\ CONFINE S1'0CXING TO AREA 4 2,1\ 2 .. 0, 1.1, 1.2\ 2.7' CONFINE STOCXING TO AREA S o.o, 0,0\ o.o, o.o, o.o, Q9 _ANGLER USE, PRESENT USE OJ( 71,4\ 74,6\ 69,5\ 66,2\ 71,0\ HOR& ANGLERS OK 4, 1\ 4,9\ 3,7\ 2,6\ 3,9\ TOO XANY ANGLERS NOW 24,S\ 20,5\ 26.S'l 31 ,2\ 2s.1, Q10 NONANGLER BOAT USE1 PRESENT USE OK 70.0\ 74,3\ 70.t\ 58.7\ 69,5\ HORS NONANCLER BOATS OK 6.5\ 6,2,. 4,6\ 9,3\ 6,6\ TOO MANY NONANGLER BOATS NOW 23,S\ 19,5\ 25,J\ 32.0lo 23.9\ SAMPLE SIZE: .,, 259 97 89 371 ( AREA t • MOUTH TO HENORICXS BRIOOE AREA 2 ., HENOIUCKS BRIDGE TO LEAeURG OAM AREA 3 • LEA.BURG OAK TO IlWE RIVER AREA 4 • lUl()Vg l3LU£ RIVER AR.EA S • TRIBUTA.Ru:s Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife -104- Page 110 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Appendix B. Results of 1986 McKenzie River angler opinion survey by angler type. ANGLER TYPE SURVEY QIJESTION Af,L BANK BOAT TROUT SALMON/ BOTH ANGLERS STEELHEAD LOCATION OF RESIDENCE: MCKENZIE VALLEY 7.7'6 6.5% 8.9% 6.3% 10.6\ 7.4\ EVGENE/SPRINGFIELD 71.4' 71, 7\ 71.1\ 66.% 78.3\ 74, 1\ OUTSIDE LOCAL AREA 20.9\ 21.n 20. ,, 26,8\ 11. a 18.5\ SPECIES FISHING FOR: TROUT 51.8\ 60 .oi 42.9\ 100 .o, SALMON OR S'l'EELHEAD 25.2\ 20 .8\ 29.% 100.0'll. BOTH 23 .0\ 19,2'1> 27 .2, 100 .0\ ANGLING METHOD: BAlT 31,5\ 43.% 18,0\ 37 ,6";. 32.4'1!. 16.9\ FLIES 11.8\ 4.0\ 20.J\\ 17 .4\ 1.0\ 11.1% LURES 10.8\ 9,8\ 11.9\ 8, 2\ 18.4\ a.5, COMBINATION 45.9\ 42.J\\ 49.7\ 36.9\ 48.3'; 63.5\ Q1 TIMES FISHED: 0 0.% 0,8\ 1, 1\ 0,8\ 0.0\ 2.3% ,_, 27.5\ 32.J\\ 22 ,6\ 35 .a, 16.0\ 22. 1\ 6-10 16.6i 15 .5\ 17.7'6 18,6\ 15.si 13.4\ 11-25 26.8'+. 24.Si 29.1\ 23. 3\ 29,4\ 31.4\ 26-50 18,4\ 17.6% 19,3i 14 .Ji 23. 7i 21, 5\ 51-100 7.% 6.9't. 9.0% 5,8\ 12.9\ 7,0\ MORE THAN 100 l.% 2, 4\ 1.4i 1,3\ 2.6\ 2, Ji Q2 RATE FISHING: TROUT GOOD 59.% 57.?i 62.2\ 59.6\ 58.8\ 61.8\ TROUT FAIR 36 .4\ 37.8\ 34.9\ 36. a J8.1i 35.3% TROUT POOR 3,711, 4,S't. 2,9't. 4 .Ji 3. 1\ 2, 9\ SALMON GOOD 15.8\ 16,2\ 15,5\ 12,4\ 20, 7% 12.4\ SALMON FAIR 57.5% 64,?i 53.0% 59,0\ SJ• 1\ 61.S't. SALMON POOR 26.8't. 19.1\ 31.5 ... 28,6\ 26.2\ 25.7'6 STEEI,HEAD GOOD 37. 7% 38,9\ 36.9% 32 .8\ 51.7\ 24.3\ STEELHEAD FAIR 50.9'11 51.1% so. 7\ 50, 7'i, 42, 1\ 62,5% STEELHEAD POOR 11.4\ 10 .oi 12.3% 16.4% 6.2\ 13.2% Q3 RAINBOW STOCKING: INCREASE 29.0\ 33.4\ 24.2\ 31.9\ 22.4\ 29. 7\ DECREASE 5.ni. 3 .4\ 6,% 2,411, 10,7\ 4.9\ REMAIN THE SAME 63 .8% 63.0'+, 64.6\ 64, O't. 64.3\- 62,7\ STOP COMPLETEL'( 2. 1\ 0.2, 4.3't. ,.n. 2.6\ 2.n Q4 AREA TO STOCK RB: SAME AS PRESENT 84 .5i 84, 7\ 84.3\ 84.8'+> 81,8\ 87.4\ AREA 1 4.8\ 3.8\ 5.9\ 3.6% 8,3\ 3.3\- AREA 2 2.3i 2,6\ 2. 1\ 2, 1\ 3.6% 1.3\ AREA 3 2.2, 2. oi 2,4\ 2,6\ 2, 1\ 1.3% AREA 4 3,4'11 3.3\- 3.6\ 3,9\ 2.6\ 3.3\\ AREA 5 2.7i 3.6% 1 .ai 3, 1\ 1 .6% 3.3% QS PROHIBIT BAIT: YES '10,9'11 9.B't. 11.9\ 12,4\ 6.7'6 12.2\ NO 52. 7% 63,2\ 42.2% 55 ,3\ 51.1% 48.8% PROHIBIT IF RELEASE WILD • 13. 7% 13,3\ 14 ,2\ 14.6\ 14.8% 10,7% NO BAIT IN AREA 3.3\ 2,5\ 4.1\ 3,4\ 3,1\ 3 ,4% NO BAIT IN AREA ' 3.6% 3. o, 4. ,i 2,9\ 3,6% 4.9% ND BAIT IN AREA 3' 7,6\ 4,1\ 11.0\ 5.2"t. 9.4% 10.7% NO BAIT IN AREA 4 8. , ... 4.l'!. 12.2% 6.Ji 10.8i 9.3% NO BAIT IN AREA s o.n, 0,0\ 0 .2"t. 0.0\ 0,4" o .oi Q6 ANGLING REGULATIONS1 RELEASE ALL TROUT 2,9\ 1.5\ 4.4\ 3 .oi 1 .6% 4.3% KEEP HATCHER'( AND RELEASE WILD 46.9\ 37.7% 56,7% 42, l'!. 58,3\ 45. 1i DON'T CHANGE 50.2% 60.8\ 38.8\ 54 .9% 40,1\ 50 .6% Q7 PREFERRED CATCH & RELEASE AREA: ENTIRE RIVER 67,l'I, 70.6%. 64.8\ 69.4\ 63.6'11 63.6\ AREA 4,4\ 4,7'\ 4,2\ 4.6\ 6,2\ 2.oi AREA ' 4,6\ 5. 9% 3 .0i 4,6\ 5,4\ 4,0ll. AREA ' 11,5\ 8.8\ 13. 3"t. 9.7\ 13. 2\ 14.1% AREA '4 12 .4\ 10 .oi 14 ,0\ 11,7\ 11,6\ 16.2\ AREA s 0 ,O't. o.oi 0,0\ 0,0\ 0 .o, 0,0\ Q8 STEELHEAD STOCKING: CONTINUE 87. 7\ 93.4\ a2 .oi 87, 3\ 86.0\ 90,7\ I DISCONTINUE 2.6\ 1. 5\ 3.8\ 3 ,4\ 1,9\ l ,6\ CONFWE STOCKING TO AREA 2,6\ 1. 2\ 4, 0\ 2.2\. 4,7% ,. 1\ CONFI?-:8 STOCKING TO AREA 2' 2.6\ 1, 2\ 4,0't. 2.2\ 4.7% 1. 1% CONFINE STOCKING TO AREA 3 2,4\ , . si 3. 31:i 2,4\ 1,9'\ 2, 7\ CONf'INE STOCKING TO AREA 4 ·2.a 1,2\ 3. O't. 2.4\ 0.9% 2.n CotlF!NE STOCKING TO AREA 5 o.oi 0.0% 0,0\ o.o, O,O't. 0,0\ Q9 ANGt.ZR USE: PRESENT IJSE OK 71.4\ 73,6\ 69.2\ 78. 1\ 59.1\ 71.4% MORE ANGLERS OK 4, n, 6. 1\ 2.0\ 5, 3% 2, 1\ 3.7% TOO MAN¥ ANGLERS NOW 24, 51. 20, 4\ 28 ,fj't, 16,7\ 38.9\ 2•1.8\ Q10 NO!lANGLEH DOAT USE: PRES!:':NT USE OK 70,0\ 70 .8\ 69. 1't. 71.4\ 72. 7'>, 63.6\ MORE NONANGLER BOATS OK 6.5\ 5,9\ 7. 2% 6.7% 3 .3\ 9.9\ TOO MA~Y NON.l\NGLER BO,\TS NOW 23. Si 23 ,2't. 23 .8\ 21, 9'+> 24 .0\ 26.5\ SAMPLE SIZE: 822 "' 394 426 ~07 189 AREA ~ MOUTH TO HENDRICKS BRIDGE AREA 2' HENDRICKS BRIDGE TO LEABURG 011..~ AREA 3 LEABURG DAM TO BLUE RIVER ARES 4 ABOVE BLUE RIVER AREA 5 " TRIBUTARIES Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife -105- Page 111 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Appendix D. Miscellaneous suggestions and comments made by two or more anglers in response to Question 11 of McKenzie River 1986 angler opinion survey. No. of Anglers Suggestion or Conrnent 77 ODFW c!oing good job of McKenzie River fish management 22 Require release of wild trout on all or portion of river 15 Improve anti-litter incentives, including better deposit sites and pick-up programs. 14 Require fly fishing on all or part of the river 9 Regulate nonangler boater use 8 Require barbless hooks on all or a portion of river 8 Prohibit use of motor boats 8 Provide impJoved enforcement of angling regulations 7 Provide educational information to improve sportsmanship and public understanding of fish management 5 Increase river flows affected by EWEB canals 4 Provide free bank access along entire river 4 Provide improved river access for handicapped or elderly anglers ( 4 Introduce a winter steelhead run 3 Prohibit use of bait 3 Create two-trout daily catch limit 3 Adopt angling regulations similar to Deschutes River 3 Improve wild fish habitat 3 Improve number and condition of boat ramps 2 Require single hooks to reduce fish snagging at Hayden Bridge 2 Provide more funding for fish management programs 2 Require use of lures only 2 Reduce hatchery trout stocking 2 Require alternate day bank and boat angling 2 Stock more steelhead and fewer trout 2 Increase daily catch limit for trout 2 Stock steelhead throughout entire river 2 Stock more steelhead above Leaburg Dam 2 Stock steelhead with a planting boat ( -106- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 112 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Appendix 3 Oregon Administrative Rules for Fish Management of the McKenzie Subbasin Applicability 635-500-266 OAR 635-500-266 through OAR 635-500-276 apply to the McKenzie River subbasin which includes the main stem McKenzie River, its tributaries, and Leaburg Pool. These rules are in addition to, and not in lieu of, rules which apply to the Willamette River basin. ef. 1-29-88 llabitat 635-500-267 (1) The following policies apply to the McKenzie River subbasi n: (a) Potential losses of fish production from habitat degradation will be prevented or reduced to the extent possible. (bl Proposed habitat improvement projects should be jointly reviewed and prioritized annually by the Department and the participating land management agencies. (2) In accordance with these policies, it is the objective of the Department to: (a) Maintain or improve-upstream and downstream passage for fish. (b) Provide optimum flow, water quality, and physical habitat character istics in the McKenzie River and tributaries for fish production. (3) Restore and enhance riparian and in-stream habitat to meet the pro duction objectives for the fish species in the subbasin. ef. 1-29-88 Resident Trout 635-500-268 (1) The following policies apply to resident trout in the McKenzie River subbasin: (a) Production of wild trout will be emphasized. Hatchery trout will be stocked in specified areas. (b) Catch-and-release of wild trout will be actively encouraged to enhance wild trout production and angling. Hatchery trout will be marked to allow anglers to more easily identify and release wild trout. Information on methods for properly releasing fish will be provided to the public to increase survival of fish after release. (cl Cape Cod hatchery stock will be used to minimize movement of hatchery trout out of stocked areas and to minimize interbreeding between hatchery trout and native wild trout. (d) Trout fisheries will be managed to provide a diversity of angling opportunities. (2) In accordance with these policies, it is the objective of the Department to: (a) Optimize the abundance and potential catch rate of wild trout- Option (l)(a) of the Wild Fish Management Policy--in the main stem of the McKenzie River from the mouth to Hayden Bridge. (bl Enhance the production and potential catch rate for wild trout and provide an early season fishery for hatchery trout by stocking about 20,000 legal sized rainbow trout--Option (l)(b) of the Wild Fish Management Policy- in the main stern of the McKenzie River from Hayden Bridge to Leaburg Dam. (c) Provide a fishery for hatchery trout by stocking about 125,000 legal sized rainbow trout and maintain the production of wild trout--Option (l)(c) of the Wild Fi sh Management Policy- -in the main stem McKenzie River from -107- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 113 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Leaburg Dam to Paradise Campground, Blue River from Blue River Reservoir to Quentin Creek, and the South Fork McKenzie River from Cougar Reservoir to Frissell Campground. (d) Enhance production of wild trout in the main stem of the McKenzie River above Paradise Campground and in tributaries of the McKenzie River (except for stocked sections of Blue River and the South Fork) and allow a harvest of wild trout in tributaries of the McKenzie River that are currently open to angling~-option (l)(a) of the Wild Fish Management Policy. ef. 1-29-88 Sllllller Steelhead 635-500-269 (1) The following policy applies to summer steelhead in the McKenzie River subbasin: Summer steelhead will be managed for production and harvest of hatchery fish--Option (l)(c) of the Wild Fish Management Policy. (2) In accordance with this policy, it is the objective of the Depart- ment to: . (a) Pro vi de an average .annual sport catch of 1,200 adult summer steel head produced from a maximum release of 120,000 smolts. (bl Reduce the potential impact of summer steelhead on the production of native trout and spring chinook. (c). Develop a brood stock from adults returning to the McKenzie River to produce smolts for the McKenzie and Middle Fork Willamette subbasins. ef. 1-29~88 Winter Steelhead 635-500-270 It is the policy of the Department that winter steelhead will not be released in the McKenzie River subbasin. ef. 1-29-88 Spring Chinook 635-500-271 (1) The following policies apply to spring chinook in the McKenzie River subbasin: (a) The McKenzie River subbasin will be managed for the production and harvest of wild and hatchery spring chinook--Option (l)(b) of the Wild Fish Management Policy. To compensate for loss of production above Cougar and Blue River dams, 4,060 adults returning to McKenzie River will be produced annually from release of hatchery smolts. As many as possible of the remainder of the run will be naturally produced. (b) Lost Creek will be managed for the production of wild spring chinook--Option (l)(a) of the Wild Fish Management Policy. (cl Presmolt and fry releases in streams for STEP and other programs will be limited to experimental levels and evaluated as to their effectiveness and their impacts on other salmonids. ( d) Adults that return to McKenzie Hatchery wi 11 be used for brood stock to produce hatchery fish released in the subbasin. Other Willamette stocks may be substituted when returns to the McKenzie River are insufficient for hatchery production. (2) In accordance with these policies, it is the objective of the Department to: (a) Increase the average annual run of spring chinook entering the McKenzie River to 18,000 adults. (b) Provide opportunity to harvest 2,-000 spring chinook in the McKenzie River sport fishery. ef. 1-29-88 ( -108- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 114 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988 Fa 11 Chlmiok 635-500-272 It is the policy of the Department that fall chinook will not be stocked in the McKenzie subbasin. In accordance with this policy it is the objective of the Department to minimize production of fall chinook in the McKenzie River subbasin. ef. 1-29-88 Coho 635-500-273 It is the policy of the Department that coho will not be stocked in the McKenzie subbasin. ef. 1-29-88 Mountain Whitefish 635-500-274 It is the objective of the Department to increase public awareness of the angling opportunities for whitefish. ef. 1-29-88 Miscellaneous Species 635-500-275 It is the objective of the Department to maintain viable populations of native fish species not addressed separately in OAR 635-500-268 through OAR 635-500-274. ef. 1-29-88 Angling Access 635-500..:216 (1) The followirig'policies apply to ahgling access in the McKenzie River subbasin: (a) The Department will seek to provide access for boat and bank angling that will satisfy public need for a variety of angling opportunities and a dispersion of angling effort throughout the subbasin. · (b) Acquisition and development of angler access sites will be con sistent with guidelines and objectives for management of fish species and habitat. (2) In accordance with these policies, it is the objective of the Department to: (a) Maintain permanent access for boat anglers at an average of one access site per two to three miles of the main stem upstream to Ollalie Campground. · · (b) Increase bank angling access, especially from the mouth upstream to Blue River. ef. 1-29-88 -109- Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Page 115 of 115 McKenzie Subbasin Fish Management Plan 1988