HATCHERY AND GENETIC MANAGEMENT PLAN

(HGMP)

Hatchery Program: Oregon SAFE Spring Chinook Program

Species or Spring Chinook (Multiple Stocks) Hatchery Stocks:

Agency/Operator: Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW)

and Clatsop County Fisheries (CCF)

Watershed and Region: Columbia River Estuary and Youngs Bay

Date Submitted: September 28, 2005 First Update Submitted: May 2, 2016 Second Update Submitted: September 28, 2017

Date Last Updated: March 31, 2017

Oregon SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 1 2 SECTION 1. GENERAL PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

1.1) Name of hatchery or program.

Select Area Fishery Enhancement (SAFE) Spring Chinook Salmon Program.

1.2) Species and population (or stock) under propagation, and ESA status.

The SAFE spring Chinook program utilizes hatchery-produced South Santiam River (ODFW stock 24), Clackamas River (stock 19), and North Santiam River (stock 21) spring Chinook Salmon, Oncorhynchus tshawytscha.

The wild population of spring Chinook from the Upper Willamette River (UWR) Evolutionarily Significant Unit (ESU) was listed as threatened under the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) in 1999 (Federal Register Notice 1999). This ESU includes spring Chinook from the Clackamas, McKenzie, North Santiam, and South Santiam Rivers. The artificial propagation programs in these rivers were included as part of the ESU in 2005 (Federal Register Notice 2005).

The wild population of Chinook in the lower Columbia River (LCR) is part of the Lower Columbia River Chinook ESU, which contains both fall and spring Chinook. This ESU was listed as threatened under the ESA in 1999 (Federal Register Notice 1999) and reaffirmed in 2005 and 2014 (Federal Register Notice 2005, 2014). The hatchery produced SAFE Spring Chinook are not considered part of the LCR Chinook ESU (Federal Register Notice 2004, 2005).

1.3) Responsible organization and individuals.

Name (and Title): Scott Patterson (Fish Propagation Program Manager) Organization: Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Address: 4034 Fairview Industrial Drive SE, Salem, OR 97302 Telephone: (503) 947-6218 Fax: (503) 947-6202 Email: [email protected]

Name (and title): Cameron Duff (Columbia River Fisheries Project Leader) Agency or Tribe: Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Address: 17330 SE Evelyn Street, Clackamas, OR 97015 Telephone: 971-673-6057 Fax: 971-673-6072 Email: [email protected]

Name (and title): Steve Meshke (Project Leader) Agency or Tribe: Clatsop County Fisheries Address: 2001 Marine Drive, Rm 253, Astoria, OR 97103 Telephone: 503-325-6452

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 2 3 FAX: 503-325-2753 Email: [email protected]

Hatchery Contacts: Name (and title): Daniel Straw (Clackamas Hatchery Manager) Agency or Tribe: Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Address: 24500 S Entrance Road, Estacada, OR 97023 Telephone: 503-630-7210 Fax: 503-630-4566 Email: [email protected]

Name (and title): Greg Grenbemer (Marion Forks & Minto Fish Facility Manager) Agency or Tribe: Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Address: 34510 N Santiam Highway, Gates, OR 97346 Telephone: 503-897-2945 Fax: 503-854-3063 Email: [email protected]

Name (and title): Brett Boyd (South Santiam Hatchery Manager) Agency or Tribe: Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Address: 43182 N River Drive Telephone: 541-367-3437 Fax: 541-367-4399 Email: [email protected]

Name (and title): Garth Gale (Gnat Creek Hatchery Manager) Agency or Tribe: Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Address: 93634 Gnat Cr. Hatchery Rd, Clatskanie, OR 97016 Telephone: 503-455-2234 Fax: 503-455-0701 Email: [email protected]

Name (and title): Rob Dietrichs (Big Creek Hatchery Manager) Agency or Tribe: Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Address: 92892 Ritter Road, Astoria, OR 97103 Telephone: 503-458-6512 Fax: 503-458-6529 Email: [email protected]

Contacts of Backup Hatchery Facilities: Name (and title): Greg Davis (Bonneville Hatchery Manager) Agency or Tribe: Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Address: 70543 NE Herman Loop, Cascade Locks, OR 97014 Telephone: 541-374-8393 Fax: 541-374-8090 Email: [email protected]

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 3 4 Name (and title): Mark Traynor (Cascade Hatchery Manager) Agency or Tribe: Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Address: 74152 NE Eagle Loop, Cascade Locks, OR 97014 Telephone: 541-374-8381 Fax: 541-374-8191 Email: [email protected]

Other agencies, Tribes, co-operators, or organizations involved, including contractors, and extent of involvement in the program:

The United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), Portland General Electric (PGE), and City of Portland (COP) are involved through program funding. Commercial fishermen and seafood processors provide funds through a Voluntary Assessment Program.

1.4) Funding source, staffing level, and annual hatchery program operational costs.

Clackamas Hatchery : Funding source: NMFS/PGE/COP Staffing level: 4 FTE Annual hatchery budget: $456,000 Approx. cost of SAFE spring Chinook program: about 1% of the total hatchery budget.

Minto Fish Facility: Funding source: USACE/State of Oregon Staffing level: 3 FTE Annual hatchery budget: $499,000 Approx. cost of SAFE spring Chinook program: not estimated.

Marion Forks Hatchery: Funding source: USACE/State of Oregon Staffing level: 4.5 FTE Annual hatchery budget: $769,674 Approx. cost of SAFE spring Chinook program: 14%

South Santiam Hatchery: Funding source: USACE/State of Oregon Staffing level: 4.4 FTE Annual hatchery budget: $777,000 Approx. cost of SAFE spring Chinook program: Not Estimated

Gnat Creek Hatchery: Funding source: BPA Staffing level: 3 FTE Annual hatchery budget: $505,403

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 4 5 Approx. cost of SAFE spring Chinook program: 100%

Big Creek Hatchery: Funding source: NMFS/State of Oregon Staffing level: 6 FTE Annual hatchery budget: $990,000 Approx. cost of SAFE spring Chinook program: ~10%

Clatsop County Fisheries: Funding Source: BPA/ODFW/Fishermen’s Assessment Staffing level: 6.4 FTE Annual hatchery budget: $1,165,030 Approx. cost of SAFE spring Chinook program: 27%

1.5) Location(s) of hatchery and associated facilities.

1) Clackamas Hatchery is at RM 22.6 of the Clackamas River, Clackamas County, Oregon Latitude 45.2961 and Longitude -122.3603 SAFE program functions include: Broodstock source Broodstock collection Adult holding Spawning

2) Minto Fish Facility is at RM 42 on the North Santiam River, Marion County, Oregon. Latitude 44.7658 and Longitude -122.3222 SAFE program functions include: Broodstock source Broodstock collection Adult holding Spawning

3) Marion Forks Hatchery is near RM 73 on the North Santiam River in Linn County, Oregon. Latitude 44.6125 and Longitude -122.9472 SAFE program functions include: Egg incubation Rearing

4) South Santiam Hatchery on the South Fork Santiam River just downstream from Foster Dam, 5 mile east of downtown Sweet Home, Linn County, Oregon, at latitude 44.41583 and longitude -122.6725. SAFE program functions include: Broodstock source Broodstock collection Adult holding Spawning Egg incubation and fry rearing

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 5 6

5) Gnat Creek Hatchery is at RM 2.5 on Gnat Creek in the Columbia Estuary watershed, Clatsop County, Oregon. Latitude 46.1692 and Longitude -123.4864 SAFE program functions include: Incubation Rearing and release

6) Big Creek Hatchery is at RM 3.3 on Big Creek in the Columbia River watershed, Clatsop County, Oregon, at latitude 46.1460 and longitude -123.5860 SAFE program functions include: Egg incubation and early rearing

7) Youngs Bay net pens are at RM 1.5-1.7 in Youngs Bay in the Columbia Estuary watershed, Clatsop County, Oregon. Latitude 46.1697 and Longitude -123.8372 SAFE program functions include: Rearing and release

8) Blind Slough net pens are at RM 27 on the Columbia River in the Columbia Estuary watershed, Clatsop County, Oregon. Latitude 46.2024 and Longitude -123.5531. SAFE program functions include: Rearing and release

9) Tongue Point Marine Environmental and Training Station (MERTS) net pens are at RM 20 on the Columbia River in the Columbia Estuary watershed, Clatsop County, Oregon. Latitude 46.2066 Longitude -123.7573 SAFE program functions include: Rearing and release

Locations of Backup Hatchery Facilities:

10) Bonneville Hatchery is at RM 0.25 of Tanner Creek in the Lower Columbia Watershed, Multnomah County, Oregon. Latitude 45.6333 and Longitude -121.9556 SAFE program functions include: Backup egg incubation and fry rearing

11) Cascade Hatchery is at RM 0.5 of Eagle Creek in the Lower Columbia Watershed, Multnomah County, Oregon. Latitude 45.6417 and Longitude -121.9258 SAFE program functions include: Backup egg incubation and fry rearing

The SAFE spring Chinook program receives eyed eggs, fingerlings, and pre-smolts from several different locations and at different stages during a fish’s development. Hatchery operations are determined annually during ODFW’s annual production planning process and are described in the Hatchery Management Plans for each hatchery

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 6 7 (http://www.dfw.state.or.us/fish/hatchery/). The flow chart in Figure 1.5-1 illustrates the intended source hatcheries, rearing facilities, and ultimate release location of SAFE program fish. Actual transfer dates, and numbers and sizes of fish, and may vary on an annual basis due to production logistics. A map of the Select Area net pens and SAFE associated hatcheries shown in figure 1.5-2 and a map of the Willamette system and hatcheries is shown in 1.5-3 for reference. Note that Figure 1.5-3 depicts the location of ODFW associated hatcheries in the Willamette system and not necessarily just those that are associated with the SAFE Program.

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 7 SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon Program

South Santiam Hatchery Minto Fish Facility Clackamas Hatchery SF Santiam River Stock 24 NF Santiam River Stock 21 Clackamas River Stock 19 Spawning & Early Incubation Spawning Spawning & Early Incubation September - October September - November Marion Forks Hatchery Incubation and Rearing Big Creek Hatchery September - March Gnat Creek Hatchery 265,000 Eyed Eggs 975,000 Eyed Eggs Incubation & Early Rearing Incubation & Rearing November October Transfer

Youngs Bay Net Pens 250,000 @ 25 fish/lb Rearing Tongue Point Net Pens Tongue Point Net Pens Youngs Bay Net Pens November 250,000 @ 16 fish/lb 200,000 @ 16 fish/lb 300,000 @ 16 fish/lb Acclimation Acclimation Acclimation Release Early March Late March Early March Youngs Bay 250,000 @ 12 fish/lb Release Release Release 100% AD, 25K CWT Columbia River Columbia River Youngs Bay March 250,000 @ 12 fish/lb 200,000 @ 12 fish/lb 300,000 @ 14 fish/lb 100% AD, 25K CWT 100% AD, 25K CWT 100% AD, 25K CWT Early April Late April Late March

Transfer Release

Gnat Creek 400,000 @ 12 fish/lb Blind Slough Net Pens Youngs Bay Net Pens 100% AD, 25K CWT 150,000 @ 25 fish/lb 400,000 @ 25 fish/lb March Rearing Rearing November November

Release Release Columbia River Youngs Bay 150,000 @ 12 fish/lb 400,000 @ 12 fish/lb 100% AD, 25K CWT 100% AD, 25K CWT Mid March Late March Figure 1.5-1 SAFE Spring Chinook production flow chart.

Oregon SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 8

Figure 1.5-2 SAFE Spring Chinook associated net pens and hatchery facilities in the lower Columbia River, Oregon. Source: ODFW.

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 9

Figure 1.5-3 Hatcheries in the Willamette River Basin. Source: Map modified from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Shannon1/Maps.

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 10

1.6) Type of program.

Isolated harvest.

1.7) Purpose (Goal) of program.

The primary goal of the Oregon SAFE spring Chinook program is to mitigate for the loss of spring Chinook catch in recreational and commercial fisheries due to habitat degradation and passage impairment in the Columbia River Basin. Specifically, this program aims to provide high-quality spring Chinook for harvest in Lower Columbia River (LCR) Select Area commercial and recreational fisheries. A secondary goal is to supplement harvest in Oregon commercial troll, Oregon ocean recreational, and Columbia River mainstem commercial and recreational fisheries.

1.8) Justification for the program.

Hatchery production by this program provides fish in sufficient numbers to meet harvest goals in the Select Areas and in selective fisheries. Spring Chinook is a desirable species for this program because its excellent flesh quality commands a superior market value and is attractive to recreational anglers. This stock is not native to the area where the hatcheries and release areas are located. These hatchery fish are 100% marked with an adipose fin clip so they can be identified and harvested in mark-selective fisheries designed to protect wild fish from harvest. A subcomponent of the released fish (~21.4% unweighted average; brood years (BY) 1992-2012) is marked with coded-wire tags for program performance/evaluation purposes and identification of strays. Select Area fisheries provide for the harvest of hatchery-produced salmon released in and returning to Select Areas with minimal interception of non-local salmon stocks. Harvest impacts to non-local and wild stocks are managed through time and area restrictions of the fisheries. Potential genetic impacts to wild spring Chinook are presumed to be minimal due to very high harvest rates and consequently low stray rates of SAFE spring Chinook, lack of native spring Chinook populations in the basins, and lack of suitable holding and spawning habitats for spring Chinook in the area (NMFS 2004, North et al. 2006, Duff et al. 2013). Ecological impacts on wild spring Chinook and other juvenile salmonids migrating through the estuary are minimized through release strategies that promote rapid emigration from release locations that are all located low in the Columbia River system (away from upriver rearing and migration areas). Research and monitoring have been an integral part of the SAFE program, and results have been used to modify the program as necessary to ensure that ecological, genetic, and harvest impacts to ESA listed stocks are as low as possible.

The SAFE program has also served as a hatchery-reprogramming outlet during the hatchery reform process. During a review of Columbia River Basin artificial production programs, the independent Hatchery Scientific Review Group (HSRG) recommended shifting some LCR tributary hatchery production into segregated harvest programs like Select Areas, where excess hatchery fish can be removed by applying higher harvest rates and natural populations will be spatially and temporally segregated (HSRG 2009). The

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 11

Select Areas were identified as suitable areas because of their location proximal to the mouth of the Columbia River and decreased potential for genetic and ecological impacts to wild salmonids.

Shifting spring Chinook releases from Willamette tributaries to the SAFE areas has resulted a significant increase in proportional harvest of those releases in Columbia River fisheries. Between 2009 and 2013, a total of 4,755,765 McKenzie and Middle-fork Willamette stock spring Chinook were reprogrammed and released at Select Area release sites. The intent of this reprogramming was to increase recruitment to lower Columbia River fisheries and decrease the number of adults returning to upper Willamette River hatcheries and straying onto spawning grounds. Coded-wire tag recovery data indicate that the releases from the Select Area sites resulted in 1.5-5.0 times the catch rate in freshwater fisheries when compared to traditional Willamette River releases (Table 1.8- 1). Smolt to Adult Return (SAR) rates to hatcheries for SAFE released fish ranged from 0.04% to 0.08% whereas returns to hatcheries for river released fish ranged from 0.08% to 0.43%. The number of estimated coded-wire tags recovered on the spawning grounds ranged from 8 for the Select Area releases to 114 for the release groups directly released into either the McKenzie or Middle-fork Willamette Rivers. Release of Willamette Basin fish into Select Areas provides a conservation benefit by reducing the number of hatchery fish straying onto spawning grounds.

Table 1.8-1. Comparison of freshwater fishery contributions for McKenzie and Middle-fork Willamette stock spring Chinook released in upper Willamette River tributaries and SAFE areas. SAR (%) is derived from freshwater recoveries only. Percent increase represents the increase in SAR for SAFE releases when compared to Upper Willamette tributary releases. Estimated CWT Brood # CWT Total % SAR Percent Release Site recoveries Year Tagged Released Increase Fishery Hatchery Fishery Hatchery Willamette Trib 310,045 326,298 909 641 0.29% 0.21% 2007 SAFE 51,638 737,598 220 1 0.43% 0.00% 45.3% Willamette Trib 300,870 314,519 515 300 0.17% 0.10% 2008 SAFE 78,513 916,752 670 61 0.85% 0.08% 398.5% Willamette Trib 1,198,217 1,577,102 1,001 948 0.08% 0.08% 2009 SAFE 77,964 956,112 118 3 0.15% 0.00% 81.2% Willamette Trib 1,197,067 1,219,929 1,493 2,401 0.12% 0.20% 2010 SAFE 104,277 1,124,255 82 4 0.08% 0.00% -37.0% Willamette Trib 370,330 1,236,906 938 1,600 0.25% 0.43% 2011 SAFE 81,126 1,021,048 463 29 0.57% 0.04% 125.3%

In addition to the Select Area program’s original goals, there has been new emphasis on hatchery production and subsequent harvest in the Select Areas. In 2012, the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Commission adopted administrative rules implementing new principles and strategies for Lower Columbia River non-tribal fisheries (ODFW 2012). One of the policy objectives is to enhance the economic benefits of off-channel commercial fisheries by “providing additional hatchery fish for release in off-channel

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 12

areas by shifting production, and where possible, providing new production…” (OAR 635-500-6705(7)(a)).

1.9) List of program “Performance Standards”.

See Section 1.10

1.10) List of program “Performance Indicators”, designated by "benefits" and "risks."

1.10.1) “Performance Indicators” addressing benefits.

Benefits Performance Standards Performance Indicators Monitoring & Evaluation Annual releases meet production A total of about 1,950,000 smolts Monitor egg to fry survival at goals. release from Youngs Bay, Blind different hatcheries (see production Slough, Tongue Point, and Gnat flow chart) and fry to smolt Creek Hatchery (see Section 1.5 for survival at Gnat Creek Hatchery the production flow chart). and SAFE net pens. Contribution of SAFE spring Numbers of spring Chinook Conduct sampling at local fish Chinook catch to recreational and harvested annually in recreational buyers and dock side, interrogate commercial fisheries. and commercial fisheries. fish for Coded-Wire Tags (CWT) and Visual Stock Information (VSI). Increase economic value of SAFE Total annual economic value of Monitor change in economic value program commercial harvests. SAFE programs. of SAFE commercial fisheries as a result of increased production Adaptive management through Projects are identified, reviewed, Research and monitoring programs design and implementation of and implemented that aim to have been incorporated into project projects that improve the quality of increase survival of program fish designs. Examples of projects the SAFE spring Chinook program. while minimizing ecological and include rearing, release, and genetic impacts on wild fish. feeding studies. Release groups are marked and All releases are marked to identify Mark quality and tag retention tagged for identification. adults as hatchery origin fish, and checks are performed: daily during pre-release checks indicate that at marking; on each pond immediately least 95% retained the mark. All post-marking; and for each mark production releases include a CWT type prior to release, at least one groups to identify the source month post-marking. program. Program hatcheries will be operated Rearing survival rates, egg to fry, Juvenile fish health is monitored on in compliance with ODFW’s Fish and fry to smolt. Number of at least a monthly basis at the Health Management Policy and juveniles sampled and pathogens rearing hatcheries. Fish health Fish Hatchery Management Policy, observed during rearing and specialists will examine affected and the Integrated Hatchery immediately prior to release. fish and recommend remedial or Operations Team (IHOT) fish preventative measures. Disposal of health guidelines. affected eggs or fish follows IHOT policy

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 13

1.10.2) “Performance Indicators” addressing risks.

Risks Performance Standards Performance Indicators Monitoring & Evaluation Harvest of hatchery-produced fish Number of non-target or wild fish Impact rates on listed stocks are minimizes impacts to wild fish caught in commercial fisheries. estimated annually based on populations. sampling of the landed catch for CWTs, visual stock identification and adipose fin-clips. Juvenile hatchery releases minimize Release timing, location, condition, Effective rearing studies and interactions (competition and and emigration patterns of smolts. monitoring of juvenile health. Size, predation) with wild fish species. location, and timing of smolts released. Minimize disease risk to wild fish. Program complies with all state and Juvenile fish health is monitored on federal health monitoring, transfer, at least a monthly basis at the and release guidelines. rearing hatchery. Straying of hatchery fish is Recovery of program fish in non- CWT recoveries throughout the minimized. target fisheries and watersheds. Columbia Basin are recorded and summarized annually in order to estimate the amount of straying of program fish. Natural spawning of program fish is Escapement of hatchery fish to CWT analysis and spawning minimized. natural spawning areas (through ground surveys are conducted in straying). Select Area drainage streams to determine extent of natural spawning.

1.11) Expected size of program.

The current expected release (size) for this program is up to 1,950,000 smolts. This production goal is expected to increase as a result of Harvest Reform objectives (see section 1.8). The long-term hatchery production goal of this program is to release up to 3,450,000 smolts annually. Due to annual variations in broodstock collection, egg/juvenile and transport/rearing survival actual releases could be 95% to 105% of the program goal. The objective for the 3,450,000 smolts would be to produce about 26,000 adult spring Chinook salmon that will return for harvest in ocean/Columbia River/Select area Commercial and recreational fisheries. This return rate is based on recent 15-year average smolt-to-adult survival (SAS) and estimated contribution to fisheries. Of the fish returning to the Columbia River 93% have been harvested within the Select Areas.

1.11.1) Proposed annual broodstock collection level (maximum number of adult fish).

A total of 985 adult spring Chinook are collected as broodstock to meet the current production for the SAFE program. To meet increased production goals in the future this collection goal could increase to 1,800 adults. Broodstock are currently collected from the Clackamas River Hatchery, Minto Fish Facility (North Fork Santiam River), and the South Santiam Hatchery (South Fork Santiam River).

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 14

1.11.2) Proposed annual fish release levels (maximum number) by life stage and location.

Life Stage Release Location Annual Release Level Eyed Eggs NA NA Unfed Fry NA NA Fry NA NA Fingerling NA NA Yearling smolts Youngs Bay 950,000 Blind Slough 150,000 Tongue Point 450,000 Gnat Creek 400,000 TOTAL SMOLTS 1,950,000

This program currently includes annual releases of 400,000 yearling smolts into Gnat Creek, and up to 1,550,000 yearling smolts from net pens in Youngs Bay, Blind Slough, and Tongue Point Select Areas. Target production levels for SAFE spring Chinook could also be driven by allowable impact levels for future SAFE winter-summer fisheries that could enhance harvest opportunities.

1.12) Current program performance, including estimated smolt-to-adult survival rates, adult production levels, and escapement levels. Indicate the source of these data.

Survival rates based on CWT recoveries from 1988 to 2008 are shown in Table 1.12-1. The average SAS for South Fork Klaskanine (production discontinued), Youngs Bay net pens, Blind Slough nets pens, and Tongue Point net pens is 0.13%, 0.73%, 0.53% 0.51%, respectively. See section 3.3.1 for contribution to fishery and escapement estimates.

The primary purpose of this hatchery program is to provide high quality salmon for harvest in Select Area commercial and recreational fisheries while minimizing impacts to ESA listed stocks. Performance is measured by survival, contribution to fisheries, and homing rates. The total catch of Chinook in Select Area commercial and recreational fisheries during the winter, spring, and summer timeframes from 2000 to 2015 is shown in Table 1.12-2. Catches report below are primarily spring Chinook but some Select Area Bright (SAB) fall Chinook are included in the estimated catch. SAB fall Chinook are discussed in further detail in section 2.2.1 and in a separate HGMP (Oregon SAFE SAB Fall Chinook).

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 15

Table 1.12-1. Annual smolt-to-adult survival (%) of Select Area spring Chinook by release site, 1988-20011 brood years. Source: RMIS 2016. South Fork Brood Klaskanine Youngs Bay Blind Slough Tongue Point Year Hatchery Net Pens Net Pens Net Pens 1988 0.56 0.08 1989 0.03 0.08 1990 0.02 0.39 1991 0.01 0.00 1992 0.02 0.36 1993 0.06 0.68 1994 0.02 0.16 0.11 0.07 1995 0.04 0.10 0.26 0.22 1996 1.48 0.33 0.74 1997 1.20 0.78 0.94 1998 0.92 1.83 1.20 1999 1.53 1.19 2000 0.54 1.32 2001 0.07 0.04 0.35 2002 0.59 1.37 0.18 0.61 2003 0.07 0.10 0.07 0.30 2004 0.01 0.45 0.40 0.35 2005 0.75 0.15 0.33 2006 3.34 0.69 0.20 2007 0.62 0.18 0.19 2008 1.13 0.38 1.15 2009* 0.13 0.11 0.26 2010* 0.16 0.07 0.03 2011* 1.22 1.01 0.04 *Preliminary data.

Table 1.12-2. Annual harvest of spring Chinook in winter, spring, and summer Select Area fisheries, 2000-2015. Data based on commercial and recreational sampling. Source: ODFW and WDFW 2015. Commercial Recreational Return Year Harvest Harvest Total Harvest 2000 6,496 255 6,751 2001 9,269 500 9,769 2002 11,699 552 12,251 2003 7,689 994 8,683 2004 10,447 1,081 11,528 2005 2,346 157 2,503 2006 7,217 336 7,553 2007 6,745 194 6,939 2008 4,458 232 4,690 2009 4,053 274 4,327 2010 24,477 1,999 26,476

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 16

2011 11,018 418 11,436 2012 10,052 646 10,698 2013 7,958 341 8,299 2014 4,578 315 4,893 2015 13,465 3,333 16,798

1.13) Date program started (years in operation), or is expected to start.

Willamette River stock spring Chinook were first released from Youngs Bay (South Fork Klaskanine Hatchery and Youngs Bay net pens) in 1989 (1988 brood). Releases have continued annually from the net pens with the exception of 1993 when rearing strategies shifted from sub-yearling (0+) to yearling (1+) life history patterns. Experimental spring Chinook releases from CCF’s South Fork Klaskanine facility were discontinued due to generally poor returns. Initiation of the BPA-funded SAFE project in 1993 provided opportunities to expand the spring Chinook program in Youngs Bay and initiate releases at other Select Area sites. Releases from Youngs Bay net pens were increased in 1995 with development of the SAFE Project and releases were initiated at Tongue Point and Blind Slough in 1996. Direct releases from Gnat Creek Hatchery began in 2011. Current production goals are outlined in the production flow chart and Section 1.11.2. Production-level spring Chinook releases were initiated at the South Fork Klaskanine site in 2004 (2002 brood) in an attempt to further improve the economic benefit of the SAFE Project.

1.14) Expected duration of program.

The program is on-going with no planned termination.

1.15) Watersheds targeted by program.

Youngs Bay and Gnat Creek Watersheds, and the Columbia River estuary.

1.16) Indicate alternative actions considered for attaining program goals, and reasons why those actions are not being proposed.

1.16.1) Brief Overview of Key Issues

The SAFE program is a terminal hatchery production and harvest program designed to allow harvest of known hatchery fish while minimizing the effects of both harvest and hatchery activities on wild salmonid populations in the Columbia River (North et al. 2006; Whisler et al. 2009; Hulett et al. 2010; Kostow 2009, 2012; Duff et al. 2013). This program was initiated and has continued with the purpose of mitigating for lost recreational and commercial fishing opportunities due to the Columbia River hydropower system. It has continued to serve as an acceptable hatchery-reprogramming outlet in the harvest and hatchery reform progressions.

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 17

Several studies have pointed to the SAFE program and the Select Areas as the acceptable approach and locations for these hatchery programs and fisheries. Key points have included:  The program is currently providing consistent annual harvest for commercial and recreational fisheries. Select Area hatchery spring Chinook account for the majority (82%) of the adults returning to and harvested in the Select Area basins (ODFW and WDFW 2015).  Spring Chinook are not endemic to the lower Columbia River estuary, and therefore introgression of Select Area spring Chinook with wild stocks is minimized (HSRG 2009; Duff et al. 2013; NMFS 2004).  Spring Chinook return timing is separated temporally from fall Chinook, Coho, and Chum salmon; competition of adults on the spawning grounds is minimized (Duff et al. 2013).  The Select Area basins are listed as low priority and either “stabilizing” or “contributing” for Coho, fall Chinook, and Chum Salmon in the NMFS comprehensive ESA Recovery Plan for the Lower Columbia Evolutionarily Significant Units (NMFS 2013). Essentially, the LCR recovery priority is focused on other basins more likely to respond from rehabilitation. For stabilizing populations, the current hatchery operating conditions were considered adequate to meet conservation goals by the independent Hatchery Scientific Review Group (HSRG 2009).  The Lower Columbia River Conservation & Recovery Plan for Oregon Populations of Salmon & Steelhead (Oregon LCR Recovery Plan) summarized strategies and threats to lower Columbia ESUs; This assessment included areas within the Select Area basins (See Section 2.2.2). Hatchery effects on ESU populations in these areas was not a threat identified for reduction in order to achieve desired delisting status (ODFW and NOAA 2010).  The Select Area spring Chinook hatchery program is designated as isolated harvest and well-segregated (HSRG 2009). Therefore, many of the usual concerns with integrated hatchery programs (e.g., high pHOS and low nNOB) are quelled.  The HSRG recommended that more hatchery fish be transferred to and acclimated in terminal fishing locales, where they can be harvested in known stock fisheries with little mortality to other populations. In considering the SAFE Youngs Bay and LCR Estuary spring Chinook program, the HSRG recommended continuation of the current program and added that it could be increased with minimal biological risk (HSRG 2009).

Overall, the program has been very successful. Adult survival rates are generally equal to or higher than other Willamette River Basin hatcheries with most fish being harvested in SAFE fisheries as intended. Escapement of program fish to non-natal areas (i.e., straying) has been very limited (0.7%; from CWT analysis, broods 2001-2008). Rates of harvest, escapement, and non-natal straying are described in section 3.3.1 of this report.

The SAFE project was initially designed to include three phases of development including research, expansion, and implementation. Maximum production of spring

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 18

Chinook in Oregon Select Areas has not yet been achieved. Considering the value of this fishery, additional production of spring Chinook is attractive. However, careful management will be necessary to provide increased harvest opportunities without exceeding allowable impact rates to listed stocks.

1.16.2) Potential Alternatives to the Current Program

Alternative 1: Increase the number of spring Chinook smolts released and consider additional broodstock collection locations. Currently, the potential for expansion of spring Chinook production in Oregon Select Areas varies by site. Given existing facilities and production, expansion at Youngs Bay and Blind Slough is limited as the area currently covered under the Division of State Lands Permit (DSL) permit is fully utilized. The Tongue Point site could accommodate up to 40 more net pens under the existing DSL permit, however, the current production is under the criteria (in terms of pounds of fish growth) that would require National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permitting. The Tongue Point site offers the most likely potential for net pen expansion. Gnat Creek, Big Creek, South Fork Klaskanine, and Klaskanine hatcheries could provide additional rearing and release potential. Commercial fishers from both Oregon and Washington could potentially benefit from expansion of spring Chinook production in the Select Areas but additional DSL and NPDES permitting may be necessary. Any increase in Select Area production would also require additional transfers of fish from ODFW hatcheries, as the program does not currently have the ability to collect its own broodstock. The flexibility to obtain eggs from multiple source hatcheries has attributed to the stability and success of the program. However, additional broodstock collection locations may be necessary in order to increase program size. ODFW will consider additional and/or dedicated broodstock sources and examine their potential to provide for expansions and/or maintain program stability into the future.

Alternative 2: Maximize the survival of current releases. Maximizing the survival of hatchery fish is one of the primary suggestions of the HSRG (HSRG 2009). Improvements in survival of hatchery fish can be made during the stages of rearing, smolting, and release. Salmon smolts released from net pens in Youngs Bay have been subject to substantial avian predation based on visual observations at time of release. In recent years, ODFW and CCF have participating in hazing activities of Double Crested Cormorants in the Select Areas. The effectiveness of hazing activities on the survival of smolts has yet to be determined but appears to be reducing the amount of time cormorants can feed on out-migrating smolts.

The Select Area project conducted experimental releases of Coho smolts during 2001- 2004 to evaluate differences in adult survival and straying rates for fish reared and released from net pens within Youngs Bay with fish reared in Youngs Bay but released in the mainstem Columbia River. The experiment consisted of towing the net pens out of Youngs Bay and into the Columbia River. Results of this experiment were mixed but in general towing did not appear to improve average survival. Towing net pens would require additional funding, staff, equipment, and potentially contracts with commercially licensed boat operators and/or fishermen to do the towing. This venture is undesirable at

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 19

this time given the lack of a substantial survival benefit and the required investment.

Alternative 3: Discontinue releases of spring Chinook in Oregon Select Areas. The SAFE project was initiated to provide for and expand commercial and recreational fishing opportunities in off-channel areas of the lower Columbia River while minimizing negative effects on listed stocks. Due to high value and an ability to harvest fish at a much higher rate than in the mainstem Columbia River, spring Chinook released from the SAFE project contribute substantially to SAFE and mainstem commercial and recreational fisheries. During 2000-2004, Select Area fisheries were able to harvest 3-8 times as many spring Chinook per upriver impact than occurred in mainstem Columbia River commercial fisheries. Elimination of SAFE spring Chinook releases is unacceptable since it would jeopardize lower Columbia River commercial fisheries without improving the likelihood of recovery of listed stocks. This alternative is not supported by ODFW or fishing industry.

1.16.3) Potential Reforms and Investments.

Reform/Investment 1: Research the permitting process and determine the real expansion potential for each site and seek additional funding to raise fish at sites where feasible. The Tongue Point site represents a significant opportunity for expansion, however, stray rates and harvest strategies that minimize fishery impacts to upriver spring Chinook would have to be monitored. Additional production would require additional net pens to accommodate increased smolt numbers. Costs associated with spring Chinook production at this site would include a one-time cost to build and install the net pens, and additional annual costs to rear more smolts.

Reform/Investment 2: Identify a source for additional spring Chinook pre-smolts and secure funding for additional net pens, feed, and labor to increase production in Select Areas. This option would yield additional spring Chinook for harvest. Risks to listed stocks should be minimal if smolts are released when physiologically prepared to emigrate to the ocean and seasons can be modified to allow harvest of local production without imparting significant additional impacts to listed stocks. Costs have not been determined but would be significant.

Reform/Investment 3: Secure funds to pay for/expand cormorant hazing activities to decrease effect of avian predation on out-migrating smolts. Research, whether primarily through a literature review or otherwise, to determine effectiveness of hazing on decreasing predation would be desirable.

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 20

SECTION 2. PROGRAM EFFECTS ON NMFS ESA-LISTED SALMONID POPULATIONS. (USFWS ESA-LISTED SALMONID SPECIES AND NON- SALMONID SPECIES ARE ADDRESSED IN ADDENDUM A)

2.1) List all ESA permits or authorizations in hand for the hatchery program.

Section 7 (Consultation) - 1999 Biological Opinion on Artificial Propagation in the Columbia River Basin (NMFS 1999a).

4(d) Rule Criteria - The original HGMP for this program was submitted to NMFS on 09/28/2005 for ESA authorization. This is an updated version of the HGMP submitted in 2005, reflecting the current program.

2.2) Provide descriptions, status, and projected take actions and levels for NMFS ESA- listed natural populations in the target area.

2.2.1) Description of NMFS ESA-listed salmonid population(s) affected by the program.

All Columbia and Willamette River anadromous salmonids that successfully return to spawn must migrate through the lower Columbia River and estuary twice during their life cycle. Thus, hatchery programs in the lower Columbia have the potential to affect the listed ESUs in the Columbia and Willamette River Basins. However, it is more probable that the program could affect those ESA-listed natural salmonid populations that occur within the ESU where the program fish are collected and smolts are released, including:

The Lower Columbia River Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) ESU is federally listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act, effective May 24, 1999 (Federal Register Notice 1999).

The Upper Willamette River Spring Chinook ESU is federally listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act in 1999 (Federal Register Notice 1999).

The wild population of Coho Salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) in the Lower Columbia River is part of the lower Columbia River Coho ESU. This ESU was listed by NOAA Fisheries as threatened in 2005 and reaffirmed in 2014 (Federal Register Notice 2005, 2014). The Lower Columbia River Coho are also considered an endangered species by the State of Oregon under the state ESA.

The Columbia River Chum salmon (Oncorhynchus keta) ESU is federally listed as threatened, effective May 24, 1999 (Federal Register Notice 1999).

The Lower Columbia River steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) DPS is federally listed as threatened under the ESA (Federal Register Notice 1999).

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 21

- Identify the NMFS ESA-listed population(s) that will be directly affected by the program.

Broodstock for the program are currently derived from UWR spring Chinook artificial propagation programs (Clackamas stock 19, North Santiam River stock 21, and South Santiam River stock 24). Annually, these broodstocks are collected and spawned at Clackamas Hatchery, Minto Fish Facility, and South Santiam Hatchery; and incubated in the respective hatcheries, except Minto as those fish are incubated at Marion Forks Hatchery (see production flow chart under Section 1.5). Direct take of wild ESA-listed UWR spring Chinook will not occur as a result of the Select Area program because only hatchery-produced adults shall be used as broodstock for this program. Collection practices, duration of trap operation, and handling of adults in the process of collecting broodstock in the Willamette Basin will occur in the same manner regardless of transfer of eggs to the SAFE program. Each of the hatchery programs that contribute fish to the Select Area program has a corresponding HGMP that has been submitted to NOAA Fisheries. Indirect/direct take of ESA listed fish through collection of broodstock will be evaluated and authorized in the HGMPs for the hatcheries where the collection occurs.

- Identify the NMFS ESA-listed population(s) that may be incidentally affected by the program.

All listed populations occupying habitats in the lower Columbia River estuary migration corridor and the Select Area basins may be indirectly impacted by the presence of Select Area spring Chinook. However, it is believed that any incidental impact due to competition for food and space between listed species and hatchery fish will be minimal, in part due to known spatial/temporal separation of spawning and outmigration between the species of concern.

These listed species include:

Lower Columbia River Chinook Salmon - The fall component of the Lower Columbia River Chinook ESU is composed of two groups: ‘tules’ and ‘brights’. Native fall Chinook in Oregon tributaries of the lower Columbia River are almost all tule fall Chinook, with the exception of bright stock fall Chinook produced in the Sandy River. Small and scattered populations of naturally spawning fall Chinook are observed in small Oregon tributaries, with the largest numbers in Big Creek and Plympton Creek (Fulop 2003). In these creeks a significant portion of the natural spawning is composed of hatchery produced tule fall Chinook adults. Small numbers of tule fall Chinook spawn in Youngs Bay tributaries in some years. Tule fall Chinook generally arrive at the mouth of the Columbia River beginning in August, with peak migration generally in September; bright fall Chinook return timing generally is later than that of tules. Tule fall Chinook are sexually mature upon river entry and spawn soon after arrival to the spawning grounds, while bright fall Chinook are sexually immature and may hold in freshwater for months prior to spawning. Populations in the lower Columbia have short migrations, which are more characteristic of coastal populations than upper Columbia populations. Depending on spawn timing and water temperature, tule fall Chinook juveniles in the

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 22

lower Columbia River generally emerge beginning in March-April and follow an ocean- type life history, emigrating in late spring/early summer of their first year as sub- yearlings. Meanwhile, bright fall Chinook juveniles in the lower Columbia River generally emerge from March-June and emigrate in early/late summer. Ocean distribution of lower Columbia fall Chinook extends from the coast of Washington to Southeast Alaska; bright fall Chinook salmon are generally more northerly-distributed (Wahle and Vreeland 1977).

Columbia River Chum Salmon - Chum Salmon are occasionally observed in the Klaskanine River and Big Creek. Chum salmon in the lower Columbia generally arrive at the mouth of the Columbia River beginning in late October, with peak migration generally in November (WDFW and ODFW 2002). Chum salmon are sexually mature upon river entry and spawn soon after arrival to the spawning grounds. Depending on spawn timing and water temperature, Chum fry begin emerging in early spring (March) and emigrate shortly after emergence, peak emigration is usually late April. Current Chum Salmon ocean distribution is not well documented but is expected to extend along the coast from Washington to Alaska.

Lower Columbia River Coho Salmon - Coho Salmon are present in Youngs Bay tributaries and Big Creek. Evidence suggests that most Coho observed in these sub- basins are early stock hatchery fish and that relatively few wild fish are present (ODFW and NMFS 2010). Lower Columbia River Coho are categorized as either early (Type S) or late (Type N), based on their general ocean distribution either south or north of the Columbia River and their run timing. Early stock Coho salmon in the lower Columbia generally enter the Columbia River beginning in August, with peak spawn timing generally in late October. Late stock Coho salmon in the lower Columbia generally enter the Columbia River beginning in September, with peak spawn timing generally in late November and December (Watts 2003). Depending on spawn timing and water temperature, Coho fry begin emerging in the spring and rear for a year in freshwater. Emigration begins the following spring.

Lower Columbia River steelhead - LCR steelhead originate from rivers entering the Columbia River between the Cowlitz and Hood Rivers. Interaction between LCR steelhead juveniles and SAFE spring Chinook should be negligible because of the limited overlap in area and time and would be limited to the Columbia River Estuary.

Listed populations that may be incidentally affected by the SAFE spring Chinook salmon program include species utilizing habitat in the North and South Forks of the Klaskanine River, Youngs River, Lewis and Clark River, Youngs Bay, Gnat Creek, Big Creek, and the Columbia River and estuary downstream of Youngs Bay. All NMFS ESA-listed salmonids (including LCR steelhead) use the lower Columbia River as a migratory route, although effects of the SAFE spring Chinook salmon program are expected to be minimal due to differential timing and rapid outmigration of smolts and proximity of release sites to the Columbia River mouth (limited overlap in outmigration). Potential for impacts associated with the SAFE spring Chinook program are more likely to occur in populations of threatened Chinook and Chum Salmon, as well as Coho Salmon that may

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 23

occur in the Youngs Bay tributaries. In the Youngs Bay tributaries, wild tule fall Chinook abundance is generally low and other Columbia River Chinook stocks (e.g., Lower River Bright, Upriver Brights, etc.) have not been observed spawning. SAB fall Chinook (which are not included in any ESU) are produced in the Select Area fall Chinook program, and are currently the most abundant fall Chinook stock attempting to spawn in the Youngs Bay tributaries. Big Creek natural spawning fall Chinook are predominately Lower River tule stock, however, it is assumed that a large proportion of the natural spawners are hatchery-produced fish. Steelhead present in the Select Areas and the tributaries are part of the Western Washington Steelhead DPS and are not ESA listed.

2.2.2) Status of NMFS ESA-listed salmonid population(s) affected by the program.

- Describe the status of the listed natural population(s) relative to “critical” and “viable” population thresholds (see definitions in “Attachment 1").

In referring to the SAFE spring Chinook program NMFS (2004) indicated that the program appears to be operating as designed and is not expected to affect the viability of the Youngs Bay, Big Creek, and surrounding tributary tule fall Chinook populations. The Willamette/Lower Columbia Technical Recovery Team (WLC-TRT) (McElhany et al. 2000, 2003, 2004, 2006) defined biological viability criteria within ESUs, strata, and populations for the LCR and Willamette. The approach to viability criteria was guided by the NMFS Technical Memorandum, “Viable Salmonid Populations and the Recovery of Evolutionarily Significant Units” (McElhany et al. 2000). The viability criteria are based on the Viable Salmon Population (VSP) framework, which includes biological parameters of abundance, productivity, spatial structure, and diversity at the population/strata level. These parameters are integrated to produce an extinction risk level (very low, low, moderate, high, very high) or conversely a persistence probability (very high, high, moderate, low, very low). Persistence probabilities (adapted from McElhany et al. 2004) for Chinook, Chum, and Coho Salmon in the Youngs Bay, Big Creek, Clatskanie, and Scappoose are shown in Table 2.2.2-1.

ESU level viability criteria developed by the WLC-TRT were considered in the Oregon LCR Recovery Plan (ODFW and NMFS 2010). The ESU viability criteria determines how many populations and which populations should be at particular extinction risk levels for an ESU to have an acceptably low risk of extinction. Populations within an ESU are categorized as primary, contributing, and stabilizing based on how the population influences the delisting of the ESU where: - Primary: Maintain a low or very low extinction risk classification, - Contributing: Reduce extinction risk one or more classifications, although not to a viable level of low or very low extinction risk. - Stabilizing: Maintain the current non-viable risk class

Viability criteria, risk of extinction at the population/strata/ESU level, population contribution to ESU delisting, current and desired risk class, and confidence in achieving delisting goals were considered and adopted by the Oregon Recovery Plan team. A

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 24

summary of information is presented in Table 2.2.2-1 (this table is excerpted from Table 6-36 of the Oregon LCR Recovery Plan). The populations in the vicinity of the Select Area program (Youngs Bay and Big Creek) are considered “stabilizing” (except Big Creek Fall Chinook, which is considered “contributing”). The extinction risk for these populations is currently considered very high or high, however, the delisting scenarios proposed by the Oregon LCR Recovery Plan does not prioritize the populations as needing improvement for successful recovery of the ESU.

The Oregon Recovery Plan team also considered individual threats and corresponding need for reduction to achieve the desired delisting status. The summary results of this analysis are shown in Table 2.2.2-2. The improvements necessary for the ESU delisting scenarios outlined by the Oregon LCR Recovery Plan do not include decreased effects of hatchery fish on Coho and Fall Chinook in the Youngs Bay and Big Creek populations. Tributary and estuary habitat and predation levels were identified as the major threats to recovery of those populations.

Table 2.2.2-1. Summary of current status and delisting scenario for Coho, fall Chinook, steelhead, and Chum populations in Youngs Bay, Big Creek, Clatskanie River, and Scappoose Creek. Source: ODFW and NMFS (2010).

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 25

Table 2.2.2-2. Summary of percent improvement required in each threat category to achieve delisting status for Coho, fall Chinook and steelhead, populations in Youngs Bay, Big Creek, Clatskanie River, and Scappoose Creek. Source: ODFW and NMFS (2010).

- Provide the most recent 12 year (e.g. 2003-present) progeny-to-parent ratios, survival data by life-stage, or other measures of productivity for the listed population. Indicate the source of these data.

These data are not available. - Provide the most recent 12 year (e.g. 2003-present) annual spawning abundance estimates, or any other abundance information. Indicate the source of these data.

Spawning ground surveys targeting spring Chinook are not generally conducted in the LCR because they are not endemic to the area. However, returning spring Chinook adults from the SAFE program are not expected to impact tule fall Chinook in Youngs Bay, Big Creek, and surrounding tributaries because of the lack of spring Chinook holding and spawning habitat (NMFS 2004). The most recent spawning escapement estimates for select LCR tributaries are shown in table 2.2.2-3 for fall Chinook and table 2.2.2-4 for Chum and Coho. Estimates are produced by expanding peak counts in spawning ground surveys from select reaches within a tributary. For Chinook, stocks are identified as either Lower River Hatchery (LRH) tule or SAB fall Chinook by absence or presence of a left ventral fin clip, respectively.

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 26

Table 2.2.2-3. Fall Chinook aggregate natural spawning escapement estimates for select lower Columbia River sub-basins, Youngs Bay tributaries, Big Creek, and Gnat Creek. Source: WDFW “Big Sheet” fisheries management file. Aggregate Youngs Bay Tributaries Big Creek

North Fork South Fork Lewis and Youngs Gnat Creek Bear Creek Big Creek Run LCR Klaskanine Klaskanine Clark River River Year Tribs a LRH b SAB c LRH SAB LRH SAB LRH SAB LRH SAB LRH SAB LRH SAB

2003 30,036 0 505 0 224 160 46 0 56 112 0 19,308 0 112 0 2004 12,225 0 1,006 0 34 0 37 0 27 61 0 5,970 0 3 0

2005 7,464 71 349 0 34 0 90 0 3 12 0 4,220 0 27 0

2006 1,140 0 264 0 58 11 212 0 41 0 0 153 0 0 0 2007 1,341 0 238 0 148 0 95 0 105 0 0 304 0 0 0

2008 6,593 0 255 0 92 36 116 13 94 102 0 4,772 0 2 0

2009 5,326 0 167 101 492 27 130 39 190 3 0 2,028 0 24 0 2010 10,895 0 202 0 298 22 22 100 101 19 0 6,574 87 38 0

2011 8,090 148 0 37 431 26 838 54 286 228 0 2,682 0 9 0

2012 7,038 1,347 351 0 554 679 179 374 97 138 0 1,396 0 39 0 2013 4,818 323 194 0 518 87 891 44 264 45 9 664 130 16 15

2014 6,931 259 419 153 770 88 228 76 89 581 0 1,442 9 49 0

2015 4,325 221 117 107 128 163 101 551 23 71 0 749 0 3 0 a Expanded spawning ground estimates for Oregon LCR tributaries; S. Fork Klaskanine, N. Fork Klaskanine, Lewis and Clark River, Youngs River, Bear Creek, Big Creek, Gnat Creek, Plympton Creek and Clatskanie River. b LRH = Lower River Hatchery stock: LCR tule stock fall Chinook; includes wild tule component. c SAB = Select Area Bright stock: Rogue stock fall Chinook originating from the Select Area net pens.

Table 2.2.2-4. Chum and Coho salmon escapement estimates in select lower Columbia River sub- basins, 2003-2014. Source: ODFW Oregon Adult Salmonid Inventory and Sampling (OASIS) Project http://odfw.forestry.oregonstate.edu/spawn/reports.htm Chum Coho (Unmarked)

Youngs Bay Tribs Big Creek Run Year Big Creek Klaskanine Big Creek Spawning Ground Spawning Ground Hatchery Trap Hatchery Trap Hatchery Trap Survey Survey

2003 27 68 45 313 122 2004 24 21 128 112 0 2005 9 2 77 180 39 2006 198 11 63 225 n/a 2007 1 19 2 212 0 2008 3 19 63 229 131 2009 22 26 0 487 305 2010 26 20 48 269 10 2011 4 16 145 145 15

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 27

2012 37 9 120 188 221 2013 58 10 No Survey 223 No Survey 2014 300 57 No Survey 606 No Survey

- Provide the most recent 12 year estimates of annual proportions of direct hatchery-origin and listed natural-origin fish on natural spawning grounds, if known.

Spawning ground escapements for fall Chinook are shown above. All SAB stock Chinook are hatchery origin as identified by a left ventral fin-clip. LRH stock Chinook are primarily of hatchery origin but also include Lower Columbia River wild/natural tules (LCR tules). Hatchery versus wild origin for LRH is difficult to assess during spawning ground surveys because not all hatchery release groups are adipose fin-clipped (NMFS 2004). Because of the long history of hatchery production of both SAB (Youngs Bay drainage) and tule stock (Big Creek drainage) Chinook, unmarked Chinook observed in the Select Area drainages are probably naturally produced offspring of hatchery fish or mismarked hatchery fish. McElhany et al (2007) indicated that there is no abundance and productivity evidence supporting the existence of a viable natural origin population in Youngs Bay. Naturally spawning unmarked Coho are also thought to be primarily of hatchery origin due to the long history of extensive hatchery releases and outplantings in lower Columbia River tributaries, as well as the lack of genetic distinction between hatchery and naturally produced Coho (NMFS 1991).

Estimates of unmarked (“wild”) and hatchery Chinook and Coho in the Youngs Bay and Big Creek drainages are presented in Table 2.2.2-5. Percent hatchery origin spawner (pHOS) estimates (based on adipose fin-clips) for Coho in selected LCR tributaries are presented in Table 2.2.2-6. Data on naturally spawning Chum Salmon are limited but numbers are believed to be very low as they are considered functionally extirpated in LCR Oregon tributaries (McElhany 2007). A Chum hatchery program was initiated in Grays River across the Columbia River in Washington in 1999 and a hatchery program began in Big Creek in 2011. Comprehensive data for these hatchery-origin Chum on spawning grounds are unavailable currently.

Table 2.2.2-5 Source: ODFW OASIS http://odfw.forestry.oregonstate.edu/spawn/reports.htm Fall Chinook Coho Run Youngs Bay Tribs Big Creek Youngs Bay Tribs Big Creek Year Wild a Hatchery Wild a Hatchery Wild a Hatchery Wild a Hatchery 2003 n/a n/a n/a n/a 113 714 435 291 2004 n/a n/a n/a n/a 149 886 112 265 2005 n/a n/a n/a n/a 79 242 219 124 2006 n/a n/a n/a n/a 74 394 225 n/a 2007 n/a n/a n/a n/a 21 14 212 216 2008 n/a n/a n/a n/a 82 23 360 66

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 28

2009 0 3,926 0 7,196 26 302 792 936 2010 n/a n/a 896 13,872 68 106 279 122 2011 n/a n/a 132 2,577 161 315 160 173 2012 170 6,516 55 1,041 129 112 409 112 2013 409 8,076 0 946 10 No Survey 223 No Survey 2014 119 2,226 41 2,542 57 No Survey 606 No Survey a. Data include combined values for Gnat Creek Hatchery, S. Fork Klaskanine Hatchery, and net pen rearing/acclimation and adult collection and recycling at Big Creek, S. Fork, and N. Fork Klaskanine hatcheries.

Table 2.2.2-6. Estimated percent hatchery Coho in the natural spawning areas for select Oregon lower Columbia tributaries. Source: ODFW OASIS. Run Year Youngs Bay Big Creek Clatskanie Scappoose 2003 76% 65% 0% 2% 2004 75% 74% 6% 5% 2005 76% 76% 1% 0% 2006 29% 100% 12% 1% 2007 100% 79% 33% 0% 2008 27% 34% 0% 0% 2009 100% 68% 3% 0% 2010 69% 95% 10% 0% 2011 74% 78% 2% 1% 2012 48% 42% 11% 0% 2013 76% 87% 17% 1% 2014 77% 80% 10% 0%

2.2.3) Describe hatchery activities, including associated monitoring and evaluation and research programs, that may lead to the take of NMFS listed fish in the target area, and provide estimated annual levels of take.

- Describe hatchery activities that may lead to the take of listed salmonid populations in the target area, including how, where, and when the takes may occur, the risk potential for their occurrence, and the likely effects of the take.

Incidental take of lower Columbia River Chinook, Columbia River Chum, or Columbia River Coho will not occur through activities associated with adult broodstock collection for the SAFE spring Chinook program. Broodstock are not collected locally. Broodstock for all three spring Chinook stocks are collected at the hatchery facilities located in the Willamette Basin. Spring Chinook incidental take as a result of broodstock collection is addressed in the respective HGMPs for those hatchery programs (Clackamas Hatchery spring Chinook program, North Santiam spring Chinook program, South Santiam spring Chinook program).

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 29

- Provide information regarding past takes associated with the hatchery program, (if known) including numbers taken, and observed injury or mortality levels for listed fish.

There are no records of take of listed fish in the SAFE program at SF Klaskanine Hatchery or SAFE net pens. Refer to Clackamas, North Santiam, and South Santiam spring Chinook HGMPs for information regarding take associated with the spring Chinook broodstock collection program, as broodstocks for the SAFE spring Chinook program are collected at these facilities/locations.

- Provide projected annual take levels for listed fish by life stage (juvenile and adult) quantified (to the extent feasible) by the type of take resulting from the hatchery program (e.g. capture, handling, tagging, injury, or lethal take).

Incidental take of naturally-produced juveniles of the lower Columbia River Chinook, Columbia River Chum, or Columbia River Coho may occur through competitive interaction for food and space with the hatchery smolts released at Gnat Creek Hatchery and Youngs Bay, Tongue Point, and Blind Slough net pen areas. Few listed juvenile salmonids are expected to be present in the vicinity of the net pens area, although if present, they could be indirectly harassed during regular net cleaning schedules. Take of listed juvenile salmonids from Lower Columbia ESUs is expected to be minimal (Table 2.2.3-1).

Table 2.2.3-1. Estimated annual take of lower Columbia River listed juvenile salmonid ESUs based on typical hatchery operations a. Action Lower Columbia Columbia Chum Lower Columbia Coho Chinook Life Estimated Life Estimated Life Estimated stage b Annual stage b Annual take stage b Annual take take Observe or harass A, J 0 A, J 0 A, J 0 Collect for A, J 0 A, J 0 A, J 0 transport Capture, handle, A, J ≤ 1 A, J 0 A, J 0 and release Capture, handle, tag/mark/tissue A, J 0 A, J 0 A, J 0 sample, and release Capture and remove (e.g., A, J 0 A, J 0 A, J 0 broodstock) Intentional lethal A, J 0 A, J 0 A, J 0 take Unintentional A, J 0 A, J 0 A, J 0 lethal take Other take A, J 0 A, J 0 A, J 0 (specify) a Data include combined values for , S. Fork Klaskanine Hatchery, and net pen rearing/acclimation. b A = Adult, J = Juvenile.

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 30

- Indicate contingency plans for addressing situations where take levels within a given year have exceeded, or are projected to exceed, take levels described in this plan for the program.

Contingency plans for broodstock collection activities are addressed in the Clackamas, North Santiam, and South Santiam spring Chinook HGMPs. If take levels were to exceed the described levels in the plan as a result of spring Chinook smolt releases, the SAFE program would respond by implementing alternative strategies including changes in timing, location, and size of releases.

SECTION 3. RELATIONSHIP OF PROGRAM TO OTHER MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVES

3.1) Describe alignment of the hatchery program with any ESU-wide hatchery plan or other regionally accepted policies. Explain any proposed deviations from the plan or policies.

The SAFE spring Chinook program is consistent with and operates in accordance with the following policies and plans:  Fish Health Management Policy (ODFW 2003a).  ODFW Native Fish Conservation Policy (ODFW 2003b).  Fisheries Management and Evaluation Plan- Lower Columbia River Chinook in Oregon Freshwater Fisheries of the Lower Columbia River Tributaries Between the Pacific Ocean and Hood River (ODFW 2005a).  Willamette Biological Opinion (NMFS 2008).  ODFW Fish Hatchery Management Policy (ODFW 2010).  Lower Columbia River Conservation and Recovery Plan for Oregon Populations of Salmon and Steelhead (ODFW and NMFS 2010).  Upper Willamette River Conservation and Recovery Plan for Chinook Salmon and Steelhead (NMFS 2011).  ESA Recovery Plan for Lower Columbia River Coho Salmon, Lower Columbia River Chinook Salmon, Columbia River Chum Salmon, and Lower Columbia River Steelhead (NMFS 2013).

3.2) List all existing cooperative agreements, memoranda of understanding, memoranda of agreement, or other management plans or court orders under which program operates.

 US v. Oregon Columbia River Fish Management Plan.  Mitchell Act.  Weyerhaeuser agreement with CCF for site access.  Oregon Division of State Lands submerged land lease(s).  Bonneville Power Administration Statement of Work.  ODFW R&E contract (001-3300).

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 31

 Guiding Principles for Columbia River fisheries management (OAR 635-500- 6705(7) (a)).  This HGMP is consistent with these plans and commitments.

3.3) Relationship to harvest objectives.

3.3.1) Describe fisheries benefiting from the program, and indicate harvest levels and rates for program-origin fish for the last twelve years (2002-2015), if available. Also provide estimated future harvest rates on fish propagated by the program, and on listed fish that may be taken while harvesting program fish.

Two of the primary goals of the Select Area fisheries project were to develop fisheries that provided greater protection for depressed and listed stocks and to maximize harvest of returning SAFE produced adults while minimizing catch of non-SAFE stocks. The SAFE Spring Chinook program is managed to provide hatchery spring Chinook salmon to supplement harvest in ocean, Columbia River, and Select Area commercial and recreational fisheries. Coded-wire tag recoveries from 2001-2008 broods indicate harvest rates of SAFE spring Chinook range from 88% for Tongue Point releases to over 97% for Youngs Bay and Blind Slough (Table 3.3.1-1). Because the program consists mostly of net pen releases we consider escapement of SAFE spring Chinook as natal if the tags are recovered in Oregon Select Area basins (i.e., Tributaries draining into Youngs Bay, Blind Slough and Tongue Point) and non-natal (stray) if recovered anywhere else. The overall stray rate for all release areas combined is 0.7%; this includes recoveries in hatcheries and tributaries to the Columbia River including the Willamette River. The stray rate to the Upper Willamette River (above Willamette Falls) is 0.1%.

Table 3.3.1-1. Contribution to fisheries of coded wire tagged SAFE spring Chinook from various Select Area release sites, 2001-2008 brood years. Source: RMIS 2016. Release Site Youngs Blind Tongue All OR

Bay Slough Point SAFE Brood Years 2001-2008 2001-2008 2001-2008 2001-2008 Number of CWT groups 14 32 13 59 SAFE 90.5% 85.5% 65.6% 88.7% Ocean 3.8% 3.0% 10.1% 4.0% Commercial Columbia R. 1.5% 4.6% 7.6% 2.2% Total 95.8% 93.1% 83.3% 94.9% Ocean 1.0% 2.7% 1.7% 1.3% Recreational Columbia R. 0.3% 2.3% 3.5% 0.8% Total 1.3% 5.0% 5.2% 2.1% Natal 2.2% 1.3% 8.4% 2.4% Escapementa Non-Natal 0.6% 0.4% 3.1% 0.7% Total 2.8% 1.7% 11.5% 3.1%

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 32

a. Escapement includes unharvested fish recovered in streams and hatcheries. Spring Chinook provide important and profitable commercial harvest opportunities in the Oregon Select Areas during the winter (February – mid-April), spring (mid-April – mid- June) and summer (mid-June – July) seasons (See Table 3.3.1-3). Some Select Area SAB fall Chinook are also encountered in the late spring and summer timeframe but the majority are harvested in the fall (August-September). Stock composition of the Chinook harvested in the winter/spring/summer commercial fishing seasons is shown in Table 3.3.1-3.

Table 3.3.1-3. Commercial and Recreational harvest of Chinook salmon in Winter/Spring/Summer seasons in Select Areas. Source: ODFW and WDFW 2015.

Commercial Recreational b a Total Youngs Blind Tongue All Areas Year Subtotal Bay Slough Point 2002 6,643 2,053 3,003 11,699 552 12,251 2003 5,300 2,041 348 7,689 994 8,683 2004 6,916 3,531 -- 10,447 1,081 11,528 2005 969 1,377 -- 2,346 157 2,503 2006 5,798 1,419 -- 7,217 336 7,553 2007 5,209 1,536 -- 6,745 194 6,939 2008 3,195 1,004 259 4,458 100 4,558 2009 3,123 797 133 4,053 100 4,153 2010 20,751 2,999 727 24,477 1,967 26,444 2011 8,751 1,611 656 11,018 391 11,409 2012 8,588 961 503 10,052 679 10,731 2013 6,629 937 374 7,940 333 8,273 2014 4,039 467 72 4,578 171 4,751 2015c 9,083 3,118 1,262 13,463 681 14,144 a. Recreational harvest is calculated from available punch card data. b. Catch includes some SAB Fall Chinook. c. Recreational harvest estimate is preliminary.

Some ESA-listed Chinook populations from the Columbia River Basin (e.g. Snake River spring/summer, Upper Columbia spring, Upper Willamette River, Lower Columbia River) may be indirectly affected by the SAFE program through incidental harvest of fish in the Select Area winter, spring and summer commercial fisheries. Impact rates on these stocks have typically been low in Select Area fisheries (see Table 3.3.1-4). Fisheries are managed to minimize impacts to these listed stocks primarily through the nature of the fishing sites which are located in off-channel areas and through time restrictions designed to provide harvest opportunity prior to, and after peak abundance of non-target upriver spring Chinook in the areas.

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 33

Future harvest rates and stock composition in winter/spring/summer Select Area fisheries should be similar to past years due to an established and repeatable fishing schedule and active in-season management to stay within non-target spring Chinook allocations. To ensure impacts (lethal take) of listed stocks resulting from SAFE commercial fisheries remain within management guidelines, fish run sizes are updated and harvest of individual stocks is tracked in-season based on visual stock identification (winter-spring seasons only) and CWT recoveries, with regulations and fishing periods adjusted in- season if necessary. In-season catch estimates are produced immediately following each fishing period. Stock-specific catch estimates for fisheries are monitored in conjunction with in-season run size updates to track stock-specific impact rates. If the data suggest that impacts will exceed management guidelines, adopted seasons are modified through the Compact Hearing process. Joint staff reports are prepared in advance and distributed for public review prior to each hearing. Adopted seasons and regulations are presented in a Compact Action Notice following each Compact Hearing.

Table 3.3.1-4. Stock composition (from CWT recoveries) in Winter/Spring/Summer Select Area Commercial Fisheries. Source: Duff et al. 2013, ODFW and WDFW 2015.

Non-Local Stocks Local Stocks

Year Cowlitz Above Above Non- SAFE SAFE Willamette Sandy Kalama OR Local Bonn. Bonn. Local Spring SAB Fall River River Lewis Coast Total Spring a Summer b Total Chinook c Chinook Rivers

2002 4.8% 0.5% 16.6% 2.5% 1.5% 0.3% 26.2% 69.4% 4.4% 73.8% 2003 5.1% 0.8% 13.1% 0.7% 2.0% 0.6% 22.5% 76.1% 1.4% 77.5% 2004 1.9% 0.4% 5.7% 0.6% 1.4% 0.0% 10.0% 87.6% 2.5% 90.0% 2005 0.6% 0.1% 5.8% 0.0% 1.8% 0.0% 8.2% 89.4% 2.4% 91.8% 2006 1.6% 0.1% 3.8% 0.7% 0.6% 0.0% 6.8% 92.4% 0.8% 93.2% 2007 0.7% 0.1% 4.7% 0.0% 0.9% 0.0% 6.4% 92.3% 1.3% 93.6% 2008 5.3% 1.5% 2.2% 0.0% 2.6% 0.0% 11.7% 69.0% 19.4% 88.3% 2009 3.7% 0.5% 6.6% 3.3% 0.5% 0.0% 14.6% 67.6% 17.2% 84.8% 2010 5.9% 0.1% 8.0% 0.4% 0.3% 0.0% 14.7% 85.0% 1.7% 86.7% 2011 2.7% 0.3% 11.9% 0.2% 1.4% 0.0% 16.5% 76.8% 9.6% 86.3% 2012 3.4% 0.0% 6.3% 0.5% 0.4% 0.0% 10.6% 84.1% 5.2% 89.3% 2013 3.2% 0.2% 14.5% 0.0% 1.1% 0.0% 19.0% 60.0% 21.0% 81.0% 2014 5.6% 1.0% 14.1% 0.5% 1.1% 0.0% 22.3% 48.2% 29.5% 77.7% 2015 5.9% 1.1% 9.2% 0.0% 2.0% 0.0% 18.2% 81.4% 0.5% 81.9% a. Includes Snake River summer Chinook. b. Includes only Upper Columbia summer Chinook. c. Includes releases from and landings in Deep River (Washington Select Area).

In order to facilitate consultations with NMFS for past mainstem treaty Indian and non-

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 34

Indian fisheries, the U.S. v Oregon Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) has prepared Biological Assessments (BAs) for combined fisheries based on relevant U.S. v Oregon management plans and agreements. The TAC has completed a BA of impacts to all ESA-listed salmonid stocks (including steelhead) for all mainstem Columbia River fisheries including Select Area fisheries since January 1992 and for Snake River Basin fisheries since January 1993 (TAC 2008). The current BA addresses Columbia River treaty Indian and non-Indian fisheries for upriver Chinook, upriver Coho, Sockeye, steelhead, and White Sturgeon, as described in the “2008-2017 U.S. v Oregon Management Agreement” (U.S. v. Oregon 2008). The BA was submitted during the spring of 2008, and a Biological Opinion (BO) was subsequently issued by NMFS later that year. The current BO expires December 31, 2017, concurrent with the 2008-2017 U.S. v Oregon Management Agreement.

3.4) Relationship to habitat protection and recovery strategies.

Natural production in the North and South Forks of the Klaskanine River and Gnat Creek is likely limited by the following: water quantity, water quality, sedimentation, stream substrate, cover, and barriers to fish passage. No single entity is responsible for habitat protection and recovery strategies in the Columbia Estuary region. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Oregon Department of Forestry, the Lower Columbia River Estuary Partnership, and numerous regional, state, and local organizations have interest in habitat protection in the region. Habitat conditions in the Klaskanine River and Gnat Creek are considered to be fair to good.

Habitat protection and recovery strategies were developed in the draft Lower Columbia Salmon and Steelhead Recovery and Sub-basin Plan (LCFRB 2004). Although this hatchery program is not directly related to these habitat strategies, it is consistent with them and does not interfere with their implementation.

3.5) Ecological interactions.

(1) Species that could negatively impact the program include:  Avian predators, such as great blue herons, Caspian terns, cormorants, and gulls;  Mammalian predators such as river otters, harbor seals, or sea lions;  Introduced fish species such as American Shad, Walleye, Smallmouth Bass, and Channel Catfish;  Northern Pikeminnow;  Out-of-basin hatchery salmonid releases;  Known or unknown aquatic non-indigenous animals and plants.

The majority of the preceding species list can be characterized as predators of juvenile salmonids. These predators may negatively affect SAFE spring Chinook juvenile survival after release, and may attract predators to the Youngs Bay and Blind Slough net pens. Limiting or eliminating losses in the net pens from avian and mammalian predation is an ongoing concern. Typically, the net pens, regardless of location, are visited by several species of piscivorous birds. Sewing bird covers to the nets has been tried with

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 35

some success. Current net-pen covers need to be replaced with finer-mesh netting to prevent chronic predation by blue herons. In recent years, Caspian terns (Hydroprogne caspia) have colonized the Columbia River estuary. The colony currently represents the largest in North America. Recent estimates of annual Caspian tern predation on salmonid smolts have been as high as about 25 million (Roby et al. 1998). Caspian tern predation is highest on large smolts, such as steelhead, spring Chinook, or Coho that spend 1-2 years rearing in freshwater; predation is lower on ocean-type salmonids such as fall Chinook and Chum salmon that emigrate as sub-yearlings. Northern Pikeminnow (Ptychocheilus oregonensis) have been estimated to consume millions of juvenile salmonids in the lower Columbia River annually. Most Northern Pikeminnow predation is thought to occur downstream of dams. Pikeminnow abundance in the Columbia River estuary is likely low; therefore, effects are expected to be minimal. Walleye (Sander vitreum), Smallmouth Bass (Micropterus dolomieu), and Channel Catfish (Ictalurus punctatus) have been estimated to consume substantial numbers of emigrating juvenile salmonids. Effects of these species is thought to be highest around dams and throughout impounded reaches of the Columbia River. Like pikeminnow, their abundance in the Columbia River estuary is thought to be low. Thus, their predation effects in Youngs Bay, Blind Slough, and the estuary should be minimal.

The net pens attract families of river otters (Lontra canadensis) as well. Control measures have included legal trapping which has been somewhat successful. Incidences of otter predation continue to plague the project and new treatments are underway to address the problem. A solar-powered electric deterrent device similar to the kind used in agriculture to contain bovines has been evaluated at some sites. Additional configurations of this control measure are currently being evaluated. Harbor seals (Phoca vitulina), Steller sea lions (Eumetopias jubatus), and California sea lions (Zalophus californianus) are commonly observed in the Columbia River estuary (NMFS 1999b). These mammals are often attracted to concentrated fishing effort and can be troublesome to both sport and commercial fishers by taking hooked or net-caught fish before they can be landed. Additionally, seals and sea lions are occasionally attracted to the Youngs Bay net pens and could potentially cause damage to equipment. Anecdotal evidence from recent telemetry studies indicate marine mammals may account for some predation of SAFE smolt releases.

American shad (Alosa sapidissima) and large out-of-basin hatchery salmonid releases represent potential competitors of juvenile SAFE spring Chinook and may decrease juvenile survival through density dependent competition effects. In the Columbia River estuary, juvenile American Shad were described as year-round residents in all areas of the estuary (Bottom et al. 1984). Multiple studies have found overlap in both habitat use and diet items in juvenile American shad and both sub-yearling and yearling salmonids (McCabe et al. 1983; Bottom et al. 1984), suggesting competition for food and space. Additionally, other hatchery fish may be a source of competition for SAFE spring Chinook. The potential exists for large-scale hatchery releases of fry and fingerling ocean-type Chinook salmon to overwhelm the production capacity of estuaries (Lichatowich and McIntyre 1987). Estuaries may be “overgrazed” when large numbers of ocean-type juveniles enter the estuary en masse (Reimers 1973; Healey 1991). Food

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 36

availability may be negatively affected by the temporal and spatial overlap of juvenile salmonids from different locations. Competition for prey may develop when large releases of hatchery salmonids enter the estuary (Bisbal and McConnaha 1998), although this issue remains unresolved (Lichatowich 1993 as cited in Williams et al. 1998).

Aquatic non-indigenous species introductions in the lower Columbia River represent permanent alterations of the biological integrity of the ecosystem for numerous reasons. Impacts of introduced species are unpredictable, introduced species alter food web dynamics, and introduced species are a conduit for diseases and parasites (Waldeck et al. 2003). Significant changes in estuary faunal and floral communities have occurred through species introductions. However, for the most part, the effects of these species introductions have not been assessed. Several nonnative invertebrate species have expanded their populations dramatically since introduction, particularly the Asian bivalve, Corbicula fluminea. Additionally, ecosystem effects of non-indigenous aquatic plants are a concern for many resource managers. Of particular interest in the Columbia River estuary and lower mainstem are four plants considered noxious weeds: purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria), Eurasian water milfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum), parrot feather (Myriophyllum aquaticum), and Brazilian elodea (Egeria densa). Effects of these non-indigenous species on SAFE spring Chinook are unknown.

(2) Species that could be negatively impacted by the program include:  Lower Columbia River Chinook Salmon;  Lower Columbia River steelhead;  Columbia River Chum Salmon;  Lower Columbia River Coho Salmon;  Wild salmonids using the Columbia River estuary.

Wild juvenile salmonids using Youngs Bay, Tongue Point, Blind Slough, or the Columbia River estuary may be affected by releases of SAFE spring Chinook. However, Select Area spring Chinook are released as full-term yearling smolts so they are expected to promptly emigrate through SAFE fishing sites and the lower Columbia River estuary with a minimum of ecological interaction with other species. Ledgerwood (1997) found radio-tagged spring Chinook smolts released from Youngs Bay net pens out-migrated from Youngs Bay within one full tidal series and moved through the Columbia River estuary rapidly. Preliminary results from recent acoustic tracking studies corroborate the rapid emigration rates documented by Ledgerwood (1997), with average travel time of 11.5 and 48.7 hours from Youngs Bay net pens to the mouth of the Columbia River in 2004 and 2005, respectively (personal communication; Robert Warren; Sea Resources and Columbia River Estuary Study Taskforce (CREST)). The influence of these hatchery juveniles on predator behavior in the lower Columbia is unknown. Some researchers purport that releases of hatchery juveniles in general attract predators, thereby increasing predation on wild juvenile salmonids (Bayer 1986, Collis et al. 1995). However, other researchers maintain that releases of hatchery fish may overwhelm predators, thereby providing a competitive advantage to wild juvenile salmonids that have better predator avoidance capability than hatchery fish (Petersen and De Angelis 1992).

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 37

SAFE spring Chinook adults return at a time of year outside of the primary migration and spawning periods for adult fall Chinook, Chum, and Coho Salmon, and steelhead. SAFE spring Chinook returns do overlap with the run timing of upriver Columbia River and UWR spring Chinook in the lower Columbia River. However, as discussed in Section 2, spring Chinook are not native to the Oregon tributaries of the lower Columbia River downstream of the Willamette River. Thus, ecological interactions with wild adult salmonids should be minimal.

(3) Species that could positively impact the program include any hatchery or wild fish that die or are deposited within the sub-basin for the purposes of stream enrichment. Decaying carcasses of salmonid species may contribute nutrients that increase productivity in the sub-basin.

(4) Species that may be positively impacted through the program include any freshwater or marine species that depend on salmonids as a nutrient or food base. Pacific salmon carcasses are important for nutrient input back to freshwater streams (Cederholm et al. 1999). Many species are known to utilize juvenile and adult salmon as a nutrient food base (Groot and Margolis 1991; McNeil and Himsworth 1980). Declines in wild salmonid populations during the last few decades could reduce overall ecosystem productivity. Hatchery production, passage of unmarked fish above hatcheries, and carcass placement in the upper watershed areas of other regional area streams without hatcheries has the potential for maintaining the population dynamics of predator-prey relationships and community ecology during low productivity and shifting climatic cycles when natural returns are reduced. This program likely provides a minor net gain in nutrient load to Select Area streams due to fishery escapement.

SECTION 4. WATER SOURCE

4.1) Provide a quantitative and narrative description of the water source (spring, well, surface), water quality profile, and natural limitations to production attributable to the water source.

Multiple hatcheries are involved in this program (see details in production flow diagram, Section 1.5).

Clackamas stock eggs are reared to the eyed stage at Clackamas Hatchery transferred to Big Creek Hatchery for final incubation and initial rearing, then transferred to Gnat Creek Hatchery for final rearing and release. North Santiam stock egg incubation and initial rearing takes place at Marion Forks Hatchery, and then smolts are transferred to Tongue Point and Youngs Bay sites for acclimation and release. South Santiam stock eggs are reared to the eyed stage at South Santiam Hatchery, transferred to Gnat Creek for final incubation and rearing, then transferred to Youngs Bay and Blind Slough for final rearing and release. Cascade, Leaburg, and McKenzie hatcheries may be used as alternative sites for incubation and rearing, if necessary.

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 38

Clackamas Hatchery  River water withdrawal is covered under Oregon water permit number S49433 and S42105. Well water is withdrawn under permit number G8257.  River water intake is 100% screened with 3/16” mesh. Fish screens have been inspected (October 18, 2000) and were deemed non-compliant to NOAA Fisheries fish screening criteria (post-1995).  Chinook are incubated and reared in 52°F well-water or with Clackamas River water that is treated with ultraviolet light (UV). Either water source may be chilled during early incubation to even-up stages of egg development. After all groups of eggs are at equal developmental stages, fish are reared in natural temperature river water.  Discharge water is currently covered under NPDES individual permit number 102663.  Clackamas River water is limited by water quality (pathogens) during summer months. This means that exposing eggs, fry, and fingerlings to untreated river water may be a disease transmission concern. To avoid these problems, eyed eggs are shipped to Bonneville Hatchery for final incubation and early rearing.  Other characteristics of Clackamas Hatchery include: - The water source is pumped. - The water source is accessible to anadromous fish. - Water is from the natal stream for the cultured stock. - The water used results in natural water temperature profiles that provide optimum maturation and gamete development. - The water used meets or exceeds the recommended Integrated Hatchery Operations Team (IHOT) water quality guidelines for temperature. - The water used meets or exceeds the recommended Integrated Hatchery Operations Team (IHOT) water quality guidelines for ammonia, carbon dioxide, chlorine, pH, copper, dissolved oxygen, hydrogen sulfide, dissolved nitrogen, iron, and zinc - The water supply is protected by flow alarms at the intake and head box. - The water supply is protected by flow and/or pond level alarms at the holding pond(s). - The water supply is protected by back-up power generation.

Marion Forks Hatchery Marion Forks Hatchery uses two different surface water supplies: Marion Creek and Horn Creek. Both streams are gravity feed to the hatchery. Marion Creek is used primarily from April to November due to the volatility during the winter months. The temperature ranges from 32 to 60 °F. Horn Creek is used during the winter months due to low volatility and warmer temperatures that range from 36 to 50 °F. Also, at highest months of production, the entire hatchery cannot be adequately supplied by Horn Creek alone. The hatchery runs on an individual DEQ permit due to the 3-basin rule. All conditions of the permit are administered within the ODFW and regulated by DEQ. The water intakes at Marion Forks are not in compliance with NMFS screening criteria. These screens are above the ESA boundary for Chinook salmon.

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 39

Minto Fish Facility The facility has a total 60 cfs water right, which is pumped from the North Santiam River. The water intake screens of the facility meets NMFS’ screening criteria. The quality of water meets or exceeds the recommended Integrated Hatchery Operations Team (IHOT) water quality guidelines for temperature and other criteria for salmonids.

South Santiam Hatchery South Santiam Hatchery’s main water source for incubation, rearing, and adult holding is Foster Reservoir. There are two water intake pipes, one located at elevation 630’ and the other at elevation 576’ in the dam structure. The low pool level commonly maintained from November through May is near elevation 596’. Mixing of these two water intakes is possible and is commonly done from late May through October. Water temperatures from the upper intake can reach 70 degrees during summer. Water temperatures from the lower intake rarely exceed 50 degrees. These intakes do not meet NMFS screening criteria. A secondary, small water source is a well that is commonly used for summer steelhead egg incubation from December through April. This withdrawal has a permit.

The main water source (Foster Reservoir) is excellent rearing water for most of the year. During fall and winter months, however, upstream freshets commonly result in high turbidity. Very fine, suspended clay makes hatching of eggs and early rearing of fry and fingerlings very difficult. Consequently, all egg incubation past the “eyed” stage and early rearing of fingerlings is accomplished at other hatcheries. Rearing water quantity is limited to approximately 19 cfs due to pipeline size and head. All reservoir rearing and incubation water passes through an aeration/screening tower that reduces the head from the reservoir intakes. Spring Chinook adults have been passed above Foster Dam for the last several years and winter steelhead since the dams were first constructed. We already do have a variety of disease agents present in the water supply of the hatchery and there is a risk of infecting the hatchery production at any time. To minimize the likelihood of that happening, hatchery practices have been adjusted so that early life stage rearing is accomplished at other facilities. Should the need arise to rear fish from egg to smolt at South Santiam; it will be necessary to provide a dependable, pathogen-free water supply.

Gnat Creek Hatchery The water source at Gnat Creek Hatchery is Gnat Creek. Water permit rights are for 40 cfs. Actual monthly usage ranges between 3-8.5 cfs. Lower Gnat Creek is accessible to anadromous fish. However, an impassable waterfall is located approximately 800 ft. upstream of the hatchery. The water meets or exceeds the recommended IHOT water quality guidelines for temperature, ammonia, carbon dioxide, chlorine, pH, copper, dissolved oxygen, hydrogen sulfide, dissolved nitrogen, iron, and zinc. Flows in September and October can drop to as little as 2,400 gpm but currently an oxygen supplementation system in place to maintain DO levels during periods of low flow. The water supply is protected by flow alarms at the intake(s) and the head box.

Big Creek Hatchery The water at Big Creek Hatchery comes from Big Creek, Mill Creek, and an upper and

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 40

lower natural spring. Water from Big Creek is directed to an intake system by a weir spanning the stream approximately 1/2 mile upstream of the hatchery. The water meets or exceeds the recommended Integrated Hatchery Operations Team (IHOT) water quality criteria for temperature, ammonia, carbon dioxide, chlorine, pH, copper, dissolved oxygen, hydrogen sulfide, dissolved nitrogen, iron, and zinc. The water supply is protected by flow alarms at the intake(s) and the head box. From the green egg stage to ponded fry stage (in incubator trays, troughs, and starter tank), the water source is from Mill Creek and the two springs. During the juvenile to full-term smolt stage, all fish are reared in water from Big Creek and Mill Creek. Water availability varies from 5,200 to 18,000 gallons per minute (gpm) with a total water right of 80 cubic feet per second (cfs). At Big Creek Hatchery, seasonal flows limit production during July-September.

Lower Columbia River Net Pens The water source at the net pens is tidal (flow-through exchange). Alarms are not needed and the water supply is not a limiting factor. The water meets or exceeds the recommended IHOT water quality guidelines for temperature, ammonia, carbon dioxide, chlorine, pH, copper, dissolved oxygen, hydrogen sulfide, dissolved nitrogen, iron, and zinc. The water source is accessible to anadromous fish. Limitations include: 1) the availability of leasable space for securing pens, and 2) summer water temperatures.

Backup Hatchery Facilities:

Bonneville Hatchery Bonneville Hatchery operates on a mixture of well water supply (13,000 gpm) and Tanner Creek surface water. The water meets or exceeds the recommended IHOT water quality guidelines for temperature, ammonia, carbon dioxide, chlorine, pH, copper, dissolved oxygen, hydrogen sulfide, dissolved nitrogen, iron, and zinc. The water supply is protected by flow alarms at the intake(s), at the head box, and there are pond level alarms in the holding ponds. Water supply is protected by backup power generation. There are no limitations imposed by the water supply.

Cascade Hatchery The water source for Cascade hatchery is a mixture of untreated water from Eagle Creek (600 gpm) and spring water (15-20 gpm). The water source is gravity fed. The water source meets or exceeds IHOT guidelines for temperature, ammonia, carbon dioxide, chlorine, pH, copper, dissolved oxygen, hydrogen sulfide, dissolved nitrogen, iron, and zinc. The water supply is protected by flow alarms at the head box. There are no limitations imposed by the water supply.

4.2) Indicate risk aversion measures that will be applied to minimize the likelihood for the take of listed natural fish as a result of hatchery water withdrawal, screening, or effluent discharge.

Each of the hatcheries involved in the program are operated in compliance with their NPDES permits.

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 41

Clackamas Hatchery The hatchery is using well water and/or water filtration along with UV treatment to maintain proper fish health standards during incubation. Hatchery staff are on-call 24 hrs/day to address emergency (or unexpected) events. All ponds and head tanks are alarmed to notify hatchery staff if an equipment failure occurs. Both water sources are hooked-up to back-up generators. River water is treated with UV light during incubation and to minimize disease transmission to hatchery reared fish. Monthly fish health monitoring is conducted by a fish health specialist to detect disease early and provide prevention and control measures. The adult holding pond is locked off at night and protected by a property guard to minimize disturbance to brood fish.

Minto Fish Facility Water intake screens meet NMFS’ juvenile fish screening criteria. The facility has a pollution abatement pond.

Marion Forks Hatchery Marion Forks Hatchery is not in compliance with NMFS juvenile fish screening criteria. A study by Tetra-Tech, completed in March of 2002, showed a cost of $153,000 for the Horn Creek intake screen, and $225,000 for the Marion Creek intake. The screens are outside the boundary of this ESU.

Gnat Creek Hatchery Listed species cannot migrate above the Gnat Creek intake so the possibility of take due to water withdrawal or screen impingement does not exist.

South Santiam Hatchery A plan has been developed to bring intake screens into compliance with NOAA standards, but to date, no funding has been available.

Big Creek Hatchery Water intake screening at Big Creek Hatchery complies with the NMFS’ screening criteria.

Backup Hatchery Facilities:

Bonneville Hatchery The hatchery is in compliance with the NPDES permits. The intake screens are in compliance with NOAA Fisheries screening criteria

Cascade Hatchery Eagle Creek is located in the Columbia River Gorge and has numerous waterfalls, impassible by migratory fish. A fish passage facility is not provided at the hatchery water intake due to the limited spawning grounds available above the intake. This reduces exposure of natural fish to the hatchery intake screens. Small mesh screens are placed in the intake from May 1st to Oct 1st of each year. Compliance with NMFS screening

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 42

criteria needs to be addressed when funds are available. The hatchery is in compliance with its NPDES permit.

Leaburg Hatchery Leaburg Hatchery’s main intake is on Leaburg Lake. The Leaburg fish screens are do not meet NMFS’ fish screening criteria. The facility is operated under the NPDES individual permit and is in compliance.

SECTION 5. FACILITIES

5.1) Broodstock collection facilities (or methods).

The SAFE spring Chinook program receives eggs and fish from multiple sources. The broodstock collection methods below describe general practices for the broodstock collected at the hatchery. Detailed descriptions of the facilities, operations, and collections are provided in each hatcheries respective HGMP and operation plans.

Clackamas Hatchery Clackamas Hatchery and the North Fork Dam Ladder are utilized to trap spring Chinook. At Clackamas Hatchery, adults that swim up Dog Creek are trapped in a 60’ x 10’ x 3.5’ adult trap. From here, all adults are anesthetized and individually handled, with a portion of them being held for broodstock. The remainder (excess hatchery fish) are distributed as outlined in the hatchery management policy.

Minto Fish Facility All North Santiam CHS broodstock are collected at the Minto Fish Collection Facility. The facility was redesigned to accommodate adult salmon collection, sorting, outplanting, recycling, research needs, and acclimation of CHS; it also handles adult winter and summer steelhead, as well as any native migratory fish. Migrating adults are blocked by the barrier dam and guided to the fish ladder entrance. Attraction water is provided from a gravity fed line to the Auxiliary Water Supply structure. The pre-sort ladder and post-sort pools are supplied by five pumps.

Fish traverse the fish ladder into a pre-sort holding pool. A finger weir prevents fish from falling back down the ladder. A false weir is activated to guide fish into a flume for visual sorting. From this location, they can be directed back to the river, to an anesthetic tank, to the sort channel, or to post-sort pools. Fish removal from the anesthetic tank are done by hand and/or brail and transferred onto a table for processing.

South Santiam Hatchery All returning adults are collected at Foster Trap, located at the base of Foster Dam. A fish ladder provides access to the approximately 12’ X 40’ trap which has a mechanical sweep to crowd fish into an anesthetic tank. From the anesthetic tank (CO2 is used), fish are manually placed into a mechanical loading bell or slid down 10-inch plastic pipes for

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 43

placement into the transport trucks and transported approximately 10 minutes to the adult holding pond. A grate can be lowered to close the ladder to fish passage and is used to control the numbers of adults migrating into the trap during peak run times. Overloading of the trap is possible without this device. Adults held for broodstock are inoculated with erythromycin and oxytetracycline at collection and, again, approximately one month prior to spawning. Bacterial Kidney Disease and Furunculosis are the diseases of concern. Flow through treatments of formalin (prior to 2000) or hydrogen peroxide (since 2001) occur in the adult holding pond for one to two hours, three days per week, throughout the holding period.

5.2) Fish transportation equipment (description of pen, tank, truck, or container used).

The fish transportation equipment used at the various hatcheries is described below (Table 5.2-1). Table 5.2-1. Fish transportation equipment used at program hatcheries. Hatchery Equipment Capacity Supplemental Normal transit type (gallons) Oxygen (y/n) time (minutes) Bonneville Tank Truck 1,000 Y Varied Bonneville Tank (portable) 200 Y Short distances Cascade Tank Truck 2,400 Y Varied Cascade Tank (portable) 400 Y 30 Clackamas Tank Truck 1,000 Y 60-180 Clackamas Tank Truck 2,000 Y 60-180 Clackamas Tank Truck 3,000 Y 60-180 Clackamas Tank (portable) 250 Y 60-180 Gnat Creek None N/A N/A N/A Leaburg Tank Truck (2) 1,200 Y Leaburg Tank (portable) 500 Y Short distances Marion Forks Tank Truck 1,000 N Short distances Marion Forks Tank Truck 1,600 Y Short distances Minto Fish Facility Tank Truck Y On station South Santiam Tank Truck (2) 1,000 Y 60-180 South Santiam Tank (portable) 300 Y Short duration

5.3) Broodstock holding and spawning facilities.

Clackamas Hatchery All spring Chinook broodstock are held at Clackamas Hatchery in two 10’x 60’ concrete holding ponds with an average depth of 51”. All adults are kept separate from other stocks and are spawned under a covered platform.

Minto Fish Facility The new Minto Fish Collection Facility is equipped with treatment methods for long term holding of adults for spawning and outplanting. Minto has eight 75’x10’x6’ raceways for holding adults. Spring Chinook salmon are spawned at Minto Fish Facility and fertilized eggs are transferred to Marion Forks Hatchery for incubation and rearing.

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 44

South Santiam Hatchery An oval concrete broodstock holding pond measuring 148’ X 47’ is used for all spring Chinook adult holding. The pond holds approximately 199,000 gallons when full. 1,400 adult spring Chinook are held along with 1,300 adult summer steelhead in this pond. Approximately 5,000 gpm flows through this pond during heavy loading. A center divider allows the separation of species and a cross divider allows a separation of male and female Chinook. Adults are trucked from Foster Trap. Spawning facilities are crude and small. A flat working area of approximately 8’ X 10’ is exposed when the pond volume is lowered. All live fish must be handled manually and spawned carcasses must be carried or thrown from the spawning area up to ground level. The sloping sides of the pond complicate the use of mechanical means of removing fish.

5.4) Incubation facilities.

Clackamas Hatchery Eggs are incubated in vertical, Heath-style incubator trays. There are 182 trays allowing for the incubation of 1.82 million Clackamas stock spring Chinook eggs. Water is pumped to a head tank, and then distributed through the incubation trays via gravity flow. Clackamas Hatchery sends 265,000 eyed eggs to Big Creek Hatchery for incubation and early rearing for the SAFE spring Chinook program.

Big Creek Hatchery Incubation of 265,000 spring Chinook eggs for the SAFE program is conducted at Big Creek Hatchery in fiberglass incubation troughs. The troughs are of two sizes, shallow or deep. The deep troughs measure 17” W x 15”D x 16’ and are divided into 10 sections. The shallow troughs measure 17”W x 7”D x 16’ and are divided into 6 sections. Flow through the incubators is 10 gpm. All incubation is completed inside the large hatchhouse building. The fiberglass incubation troughs has a capacity of 100,000 eggs per trough. The vertical stack incubators (“Heath” style) may also be used, which have a capacity of up to 10,000 eggs each.

Marion Forks Hatchery Fertilized eggs from individual fish are brought to Marion Forks Hatchery from Minto Fish Facility, trayed down and disinfected. Eggs from each female are kept separate for BKD culling. The hatchery has 34 stacks of heath stack incubators. The egg take is about 1 million eggs. After 500 Temperature Units (TUs) have been applied, the eggs are shocked, picked, and counted back into the trays at 8,000 eggs per tray. The hatchery is equipped with a water heating system that enables them to catch groups of eggs up. Otolith marking begins soon after hatching and is 8-10 cycles at 48- hour intervals of heated water followed by cold water (8-10 degrees difference).

South Santiam Hatchery South Santiam Hatchery transfers 975,000 eyed eggs to Gnat Creek Hatchery for incubation and early rearing for the SAFE spring Chinook program. The incubation room is approximately 18’ X 24’ and contains 30 – 16 tray vertical incubators and two six-foot fiberglass picking troughs. A 120-gallon hot water tank is available for heating

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 45

incubation water but is extremely expensive to operate. All incubators and both troughs are plumbed with reservoir and well water. A chemical treatment system is also plumbed to each incubator. Water from the incubation room discharged directly into the South Santiam River. All incubators are equipped with low water alarms. Spring Chinook eggs are incubated from egg take through shipment at the “eyed” stage. A capacity of 3.8 million spring Chinook eggs is available but 2 million is common use.

Gnat Creek Hatchery Incubation of 975,000 eggs from eyed stage to swim-up fry occurs at Gnat Creek Hatchery. Incubation occurs in up to eight double-stack Heath vertical incubators.

Backup Incubation Facilities

Bonneville Hatchery Water temperature is monitored via a thermograph that gauges water temperature of all water coming into the hatchery. The water source is well water, so water temperatures consistently vary between 49-51ºF. Dissolved oxygen (D.O.) levels are not monitored in incubation. Incubation densities are kept low enough that low D.O. is not of concern. Use of well water ensures that siltation is not an issue. Each incubator tray has a low flow alarm, and there is a flow alarm on the head box to alert personnel of a water loss situation.

Cascade Hatchery At Cascade Hatchery, temperature is checked daily from a thermograph and has a range of 32°-52° F to the eye stage. Dissolved oxygen is not monitored, but remains between 10-7 ppm. Incubation occurs in vertical stack incubators with water flow at 5.0 gpm.

5.5) Rearing facilities.

Big Creek Hatchery After hatching at Big Creek Hatchery, swim-ups are reared in four fiberglass Canadian style tanks in the hatchhouse. The Canadian troughs are 21’x 32”x 24”, with a volume of 658 gallons of water. Approximately 44,000 fry are reared in each trough.

At ponding, juvenile spring Chinook of stock 19 are transferred outside to an 80’x 20’x 2.6’ concrete raceway. As the fish grow, they could be split into additional raceways, up to a maximum of eight. Maximum capacity of each raceway is 6,000 lbs of fish. At the target size of 25 fish/lb, the fish are transferred to Youngs Bay net pens for final rearing and release into Youngs Bay at 12 fish/lb.

Marion Forks Hatchery Rearing of stock 21 spring Chinook for the SAFE program is conducted at Marion Forks Hatchery. The hatchery is equipped with 12 Canadian style troughs -21’ long ½ round, 8 raceways 20’x 80’x 3’, and 48 circular ponds 24’ diameter x 2.5’depth. After rearing to a size of 14.5 fish/lb at Marion Forks, the fish are transferred to Tongue Point and Youngs Bay net pens for final rearing to a size of 12 fish/lb before release.

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 46

Net Pens Final rearing of stocks 21 and 24 spring Chinook for the SAFE spring Chinook is conducted at Tongue Point, Youngs Bay, and Blind Slough net pens, which measure 20 ft. x 20 ft. x 8 ft. with 3,200 cubic feet volume of storage. See section 5.6 for expanded discussion on the net pens.

Gnat Creek Hatchery Rearing of stock 24 spring Chinook for the SAFE program is conducted at Gnat Creek Hatchery. Rearing facilities include six troughs holding 189 cubic feet each and 12 raceways holding 6,400 cubic feet each. The troughs measure 30 ft. x 3 ft. x 2.25 ft., with a flow of 90 gpm and a maximum density index of 1.1 (lbs/ft3). The raceways measure 100 ft. x 16 ft. x 3.5 ft., with a flow rate of 450 gpm and maximum density index of 1.1 (lbs/ft3).

Backup Rearing Facilities:

McKenzie Hatchery Rearing facilities at McKenzie Hatchery include 8 Canadian troughs of 89 cubic feet each, and 30 concrete raceways with a volume of 3,338 cubic feet each.

Bonneville Hatchery Rearing facilities utilized for this program include 9 rearing troughs with a volume of 144 cubic feet each, 28 concrete raceways with a volume of 3,780 cubic feet each, and 32 concrete raceways with a volume of 4,000 cubic feet each. The Canadian-style troughs measure 16 ft. x 3 ft. x 3 ft. with a flow of 90 gpm. The 28 raceways are converted Burroughs ponds measuring 75 ft. x 16.8 ft. x 3 ft. with a flow of 650 gpm. The 32 raceways measure 80 ft. x 20 ft. x 2.5 ft. with a flow of 700 gpm.

Cascade Hatchery Rearing facilities consist of 30 concrete raceways 16’x80’x2.5’ with a volume of 3,200 cubic feet each. Maximum density index is 1.09 (lbs/ft3)

Leaburg Hatchery Rearing facilities at Leaburg Hatchery include 13 Canadian troughs of 89 cubic feet each, 39 concrete raceways with a volume of 7,000 cubic feet each, one half pond with a volume of 3,500 cubic feet, and six circular 20 ft. diameter ponds.

5.6) Acclimation/release facilities.

Net Pens Net pens at each rearing/acclimation/release site consist of two to four individual 6.1-m2 inside dimension frames of high-density polyethylene pipe (33 cm o.d.) filled with Styrofoam. A wooden walkway of 2” x 12” lumber is bolted to the plastic frame for access. A 3.1-m deep net hung within each frame confines the fish during rearing and acclimation. Mesh sizes of 3.2-19.0 mm (0.125-0.750”) are utilized and adjusted

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 47

depending on fish size. Vertical plastic standpipes are submerged around the perimeter of each pen to maintain the shape of the net. Actual rearing area of each net is approximately 91 m3 (3,200 ft3).

There are currently 76 pens at Youngs Bay, 37 at Tongue Point, and 15 at Blind Slough. Fish are grown and released from these pens under varying management and grow-out regimes including 2-week acclimation, over-winter, and full-term net-pen rearing. Gnat Creek Hatchery Direct release of 400,000 smolts (stock 24) into Gnat Creek is conducted in March.

5.7) Describe operational difficulties or disasters that led to significant fish mortality.

Clackamas Hatchery Clackamas Hatchery has not had any significant fish loss in the last several years.

Minto Fish Facility Minto Fish Facility has been completely rebuilt; the present facility has been in operation since April 2013. During this period of operation, there has been no significant fish mortality.

Marion Forks Hatchery There has been no significant fish mortality at this facility. The hatchery is equipped with water alarms and densities are kept at moderate levels. Diseases are not a problem. The few minor fish losses at the facility were of human error.

South Santiam Hatchery There has been no significant fish mortality at this facility.

Gnat Creek Hatchery No incidences of this nature have occurred during the duration of this program.

Big Creek Hatchery No major incidence of fish mortality occurred of this program. Net Pens No major catastrophic disasters related to net-pen rearing or related operational activities have occurred over the twenty plus years the program has existed. Several minor incidences involving torn holes in nets due to floating debris have allowed early escapement, however, the maximum event has not exceeded the contents of one net pen. Of the three Oregon net-pen sites, Youngs Bay is the most dynamic with tidal changes providing superior flushing and greater opportunity for debris problems. The only ongoing operational challenge for high survivals in the pens is predator avoidance. Bird covers of various designs have been used with increasing success. River otter predation is a chronic problem with various passive methods employed in the past. Each method seems to work for a season before the otters learn to outsmart these systems.

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 48

Backup Facilities:

McKenzie Hatchery Flood events can cause operational difficulties due to debris damage to intake facilities and by causing heavy silt loads in the water supply. Flood events cause increased monitoring of the water supply intakes or strainers in incubation building. Normally flood events do not result in significant fish mortality.

Bonneville Hatchery No incidences of this nature have occurred during the duration of this program. Cascade Hatchery No incidences of this nature have occurred during the duration of this program.

5.8) Indicate available back-up systems, and risk aversion measures that will be applied, that minimize the likelihood for the take of listed natural fish that may result from equipment failure, water loss, flooding, disease transmission, or other events that could lead to injury or mortality.

Clackamas Hatchery The hatchery is using well water and/or water filtration along with UV treatment to maintain proper fish health standards during incubation. Hatchery staff are on-call 24 hrs/day to address emergency (or unexpected) events. All ponds and head tanks are alarmed to notify hatchery staff if an equipment failure occurs. Both water sources are hooked-up to back-up generators. River water is treated with UV light during incubation and to minimize disease transmission to hatchery reared fish. Monthly fish health monitoring is conducted by a fish health specialist to detect disease early and provide prevention and control measures. Eyed eggs are transferred to Bonneville Hatchery prior the summer months to avoid exposure to pathogens and viruses present in the Clackamas River. The adult holding pond is locked off at night and protected by a property guard to minimize disturbance to broodfish.

Marion Forks Hatchery The hatchery does not hold any listed fish except the few taken for brood, but is staffed 24 hours a day and is equipped with water alarms. At Minto Pond any unmarked fish are “processed” quickly (put upstream, hauled, or used for spawning). The water for the pond is gravity fed and the intake is low maintenance at this time of year. Fish Health Monitoring and Disease Prevention standards consistent with IHOT protocols are applied at both facilities.

South Santiam Hatchery The hatchery is staffed full-time, with someone on call 24 hours a day and is equipped with low-water alarm systems on incubators and ponds to help prevent catastrophic fish loss resulting from water system failure.

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 49

Big Creek Hatchery Spring Chinook salmon reared for the SAFE program is not an ESA-listed stock/population. Hatchery staffed full time, 24 hours per day. Several alarm systems are in place to warn employees of low water, plugged intakes, and other problems. Employees work schedules are adjusted as conditions warrant (i.e. during large storm events) to maintain hatchery operations.

Gnat Creek Hatchery The potential for take of listed species due to activities at Gnat Creek Hatchery are minimal because listed fish cannot migrate above the hatchery. Pre-smolts are vaccinated for Redmouth and Vibrio anguillarum prior to transfer to the net pens. At the net pen rearing sites, nets are checked for holes during regular washing schedules to prevent accidental releases. Net pen complexes are sufficiently constructed to avoid accidents due to weather, etc.

Net Pens Procedures for the net pens are as follows; Clatsop County coordinates with the municipal government, the Port Authority and the U.S. Coast Guard for general disaster and event preparedness. As a part of that system, the CCF (SAFE) net pens are identified as “critical water dependent programs”. In the event of any potential hazard or harm, the above agencies all have the list of telephone numbers (home and cell) for CCF staff. Internally, we deploy a minimum of one staff member on duty 365 days a year, and that staff member, who may be alone (usually weekend duty), carries a portable phone for instant communications. Should contact be made the staff are trained to;

 Inform the field supervisor as soon as possible.  Take corrective action on the site as his/her judgment informs.  Contact the Project Manager if the event involves policy issues or inter-governmental relations.

The project has sustained several significant flood events, including the 1996 one- hundred-year flood without loss of fish or infrastructure. Pilings, to which the pens are moored, are of significant height to withstand such occurrences.

Backup Facilities:

McKenzie Hatchery The hatchery is staffed full-time. The water system is equipped with a low-water alarm system to help prevent catastrophic fish loss resulting from water system failure.

Bonneville Hatchery Fish are reared in multiple facilities or with redundant systems to reduce the risk of catastrophic loss. Any listed species that are at Bonneville Hatchery are kept in separate facilities. The facility is sited so as to minimize the risk of catastrophic fish loss from flooding. Staff is notified of emergency situations at the facility. The facility is continuously staffed to assure the security of fish stocks on-site. The hatchery has a

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 50

gravity feed water supply in addition to well water from the aquifer under the Columbia. The wells are powered from two different sources directly off Bonneville dam. There is also a recirculation system for 28 ponds.

Cascade Hatchery Staff is notified of emergency situations at the facility. The facility is continuously staffed to assure the security of fish stocks on-site. The hatchery has a gravity feed water supply. Cascade has some spring water available for incubation, a recirculation pump for the rearing ponds, and a pump located in Eagle Creek as an emergency backup, which can be powered by municipal power or diesel generator. Leaburg Hatchery The hatchery is staffed full-time. The water system is equipped with a low-water alarm system to help prevent catastrophic fish loss resulting from water system failure. Fish Health Monitoring and Disease Prevention standards consistent with IHOT protocols are applied at this facility.

SECTION 6. BROODSTOCK ORIGIN AND IDENTITY

6.1) Source.

Clackamas River (Stock 19) The Clackamas River spring Chinook stock was developed beginning in 1976 from other Willamette Basin hatchery spring Chinook released at Dog Creek (site of Clackamas Hatchery; ODFW 1992). Clackamas Hatchery began operation in 1979 and the first releases of spring Chinook at Clackamas Hatchery were in November 1979 (1978 brood). The last releases of smolts at Clackamas Hatchery from adults not collected at Clackamas Hatchery were in 1989 (1987 brood). Since 1988, the Clackamas Hatchery spring Chinook broodstock has been composed entirely of returns to Clackamas Hatchery. All unmarked fish are tested for CWTs. If no CWT is present in unmarked fish, then the fish are returned to the river at the upper boat ramp in McIver State Park.

North Santiam River (Stock 21) Broodstock for the North Santiam River spring Chinook program is collected from adult Chinook salmon returning to Minto Fish Facility, on the North Santiam River. Only hatchery produced fish returning to the collection facility are randomly selected for spawning. Only hatchery produced fish are used as broodstock.

South Santiam River Stock (Stock 24) Broodstock for the South Santiam River spring Chinook program is collected from adult Chinook salmon returning to South Santiam Hatchery, near Foster Dam. Santiam stock 24 is preferred, however, during low run years Willamette stock may be used.

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 51

6.2) Supporting information

6.2.1) History.

Clackamas River Spring Chinook (Stock 19) Willamette stock spring Chinook (fry, pre-smolts, smolts, and adults) have been released from Eagle Creek National Fish Hatchery (ECNFH) into Eagle Creek, a Clackamas River tributary, and throughout the basin since 1959. All releases of Willamette stock spring Chinook from ECNFH were discontinued after 1989. The Clackamas River spring Chinook stock was developed from other Willamette Basin hatchery spring Chinook stock smolts released at Dog Creek (site of Clackamas Hatchery) beginning in 1976 (ODFW 1992). Clackamas Hatchery began operation in 1979 and the first releases of spring Chinook at Clackamas Hatchery were in November 1979 (1978 brood). The last release of smolts at Clackamas Hatchery from adults not collected at Clackamas Hatchery was in 1989 (1987 brood). Since 1988, the Clackamas Hatchery spring Chinook broodstock has been composed entirely of returns to Clackamas Hatchery (and North Fork Dam to a much smaller extent).

Table 6.2.1-1. Adult spring Chinook salmon (stock 19) returns to Clackamas Hatchery, and fish used for broodstock, 2003 - 2014. Adults spawned includes all fish spawned at the hatchery. Adults Spawned Adults Counted at Brood Clackamas Spawning Ratio Year Hatchery Males Females (M:F) Egg Take 2003 5,336 169 320 1:1.89 1,644,152 2004 11,231 168 223 1:1.33 1,572,066 2005 6,792 176 352 1:2.00 1,731,216 2006 7,287 169 334 1:1.98 1,601,680 2007 6,106 167 335 1:2.01 1,714,760 2008 5,054 183 362 1:1.98 1,711,976 2009 2,840 180 362 1:2.01 1,831,516 2010 1,504 174 347 1:1.99 1,628,364 2011 1,778 166 331 1:1.99 1,585,552 2012 1,515 163 325 1:1.99 1,511,372 2013 2,052 152 250 1:1.65 1,259,708 2014 2,972 129 257 1:1.99 1,193,611

North Santiam River Spring Chinook (Stock 21) Historical records show that the Santiam basin supported approximately 33% of the naturally produced spring Chinook above Willamette Falls. Prior to the construction of Detroit Dam, spawning ground surveys showed that 71% of this production occurred in areas above Detroit Dam (Wevers et. al. 1992). The construction of Detroit Dam blocked fish from passing upstream, and effectively eliminated this area for natural production. Broodstock for the North Santiam stock 21 was initiated by collecting wild adults that returned to the base of the dam. Unlike some other Willamette spring Chinook hatchery programs; there have been few out of basin stock transfers to maintain the hatchery program. For more than ten years, broodstock has consisted entirely of adults returning to Minto Pond (Table 6.2.1-2). During one of those years, the 1992 brood year, 1,668,000 viable eggs were transferred to the Clackamas, McKenzie and Willamette

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 52

hatcheries, to compensate for egg-take shortages in their spring Chinook programs, stock 023 and stock 022 respectively.

Table 6.2.1-2. Adult spring Chinook salmon (stock 21) returns to Minto pond, and fish used for broodstock, 2003 - 2014. Adults spawned includes all fish spawned at the hatchery. Adults Spawned Brood Adults Counted at Spawning Ratio Year Minto Facility Males Females (M:F) Egg Take 2003 4,441 309 309 1:1.00 1,524,328 2004 4,052 283 283 1:1.00 1,284,480 2005 1,812 252 252 1:1.00 1,072,977 2006 3,636 272 272 1:1.00 1,206,000 2007 1,989 100 102 1:1.02 1,274,800 2008 1,132 245 251 1:1.02 1,119,800 2009 2,355 214 214 1:1.00 1,463,610 2010 4,948 234 256 1:1.09 1,253,800 2011* 853 275 275 1:1.00 1,282,660 2012* 843 268 268 1:1.00 1,253,872 2013 3,169 452 456 1:1.01 1,869,600 2014 3,782 553 557 1:1.01 1,926,000 *Adult collection occurred at Bennett Dam during construction of new Minto Fish Facility South Santiam River Spring Chinook (Stock 24) Historical records show that the Santiam sub-basin supported approximately 33% of the naturally produced spring Chinook above Willamette Falls. Historically, 85% of the spring Chinook production in the South Santiam sub-basin occurred above Foster Dam (Wevers, et al. 1992). Reservoir mortality, along with limited fish passage at Foster Dam, contributed to declining fish runs in the upper basin. Broodstock for the South Santiam spring Chinook stock 24 was initiated by collecting the wild adults that returned to the base of the Dam. However, in some years spring Chinook have been transferred into South Santiam from other Willamette basin spring Chinook hatcheries. For the past ten years, the broodstock has consisted entirely of adult returns to Foster Dam (Refer to Table 6.2.1-3).

Table 6.2.1-3. Adult spring Chinook (stock 24) returns to Foster Dam, and fish used for broodstock, 2003 - 2014. Adults spawned includes all fish spawned at the hatchery. Adults Spawned Brood Adults Counted at Spawning Ratio Year Foster Dam Males Females (M:F) Egg Take 2003 6,203 405 548 1:1.35 2,348,400 2004 10,600 483 506 1:1.05 2,149,543 2005 3,792 452 547 1:1.21 2,307,600 2006 3,669 570 570 1:1.00 2,450,110 2007 1,463 436 449 1:1.03 2,000,750 2008 2,225 394 400 1:1.02 1,713,300 2009 3,646 354 367 1:1.04 1,507,230 2010 9,381 340 354 1:1.04 1,598,700 2011 9,092 338 348 1:1.03 1,698,708 2012 8,312 337 342 1:1.01 1,610,400 2013 4,276 340 344 1:1.01 1,610,200 2014 3,424 424 426 1:1.00 1,920,200

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 53

6.2.2) Annual size.

The current broodstock collection goal for this program is 985 adult spring Chinook. To meet increased production goals in the future this collection goal could increase to 1,800 adults. The broodstock that provide eggs and fish for the SAFE program are collected as part of normal collection operations at the following locations:

Clackamas River (Stock 19) The total broodstock collected at Clackamas hatchery is made up from hatchery adults that swim into the trap at Clackamas Hatchery or are trapped at North Fork Dam. No wild fish are used in the broodstock.

North Santiam River (Stock 21) All returning spring Chinook Salmon that are not used for broodstock purposes are passed above Minto Dam, Detroit Dam, or transferred to the Little North Fork Santiam to spawn naturally.

South Santiam River (Stock 24) Broodstock that are used for the SAFE program are of hatchery origin. No wild fish are used to support this program.

6.2.3) Past and proposed level of natural fish in the broodstock.

Clackamas River (Stock 19) There is no proposal to incorporate wild or naturally produced fish into the broodstock for the SAFE program. In the future, however, if phenotypic characteristics of hatchery population warrant incorporation of wild fish, then a certain proportion of wild fish may be incorporated with permission from the Fish Division leadership. ODFW will seek NOAA approval and revise the corresponding HGMP (if necessary) before taking any wild fish. During development of this stock it is difficult to determine whether wild or hatchery fish were used, given that hatchery fish were not all marked until releases from the 1997 brood. However, since the 2002 return year all fish used in the broodstock have been of hatchery origin.

North Santiam River Stock (Stock 21) There is no proposal to incorporate wild or naturally produced fish into the broodstock for the SAFE program. In the future, however, if phenotypic characteristics of hatchery population warrant incorporation of wild fish, then a certain proportion of wild fish may be incorporated with permission from the Fish Division leadership. ODFW will seek NOAA approval and revise the corresponding HGMP (if necessary) before taking any wild fish. In the past, until 1996, not all hatchery reared spring Chinook were marked with an adipose fin clip, thus naturally produced fish may have been incorporated into the brood. Since 1996, all hatchery-reared juveniles have been adipose fin clipped, and from 30,000 to 100% have been coded wire tagged. Adult returns from 1996 brood and beyond will provide valuable information needed to assess the proportion of natural production and hatchery fish contribution in the basin. The miss-mark percentage in the

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 54

adipose clipping has ranged from approximately 3-8%. In 2001, all fish used for brood were known hatchery fish. In 2002 only 5 unmarked females (<1%) were incorporated into the broodstock.

South Santiam River Stock (Stock 24)

No plan to incorporate wild fish as broodstock for the SAFE spring Chinook program. In the future, however, if phenotypic characteristics of hatchery population warrant incorporation of wild fish, then a certain proportion of wild fish may be incorporated with permission from the Fish Division leadership. ODFW will seek NOAA approval and revise the corresponding HGMP (if necessary) before taking any wild fish. Before 1996, not all hatchery spring Chinook were marked, hence, naturally produced fish may have been included during broodstock collection and spawning through 2001. In 2002, of 45 unmarked Chinook incorporated into the brood stock, 42% were actually hatchery origin fish based on otolith analysis (ODFW, unpublished data).

6.2.4) Genetic or ecological differences.

The SAFE spring Chinook hatchery stock is derived from Willamette Basin stocks. Information about genetic and ecological differences between hatchery and wild fish is not currently available. Spring Chinook are not native in the SAFE release areas, and this program produces fish for harvest only.

6.2.5) Reasons for choosing.

These broodstock were selected because of availability, and they are a high quality salmonid stock with a high commercial and recreational value.

6.3) Indicate risk aversion measures that will be applied to minimize the likelihood for adverse genetic or ecological effects to listed natural fish that may occur as a result of broodstock selection practices.

Clackamas Hatchery With few exceptions, all hatchery fish are marked and returning hatchery adults with visible fin clips or coded-wire tags are sorted and removed from the upstream migrant population by PGE at the North Fork Dam on the Clackamas River under the direction of ODFW. Hatchery adults are recycled downstream back through the Clackamas River sport fishery, or delivered to Clackamas Hatchery for disposition or sale for competitive bid process. Marked hatchery fish are not intentionally allowed to pass into the upper basin to spawn with wild fish

Hatchery broods were originated from broodstock returning to Clackamas Hatchery, but originating from Willamette River spring Chinook stocks. Broods are currently taken across the hatchery adult return period in proportion to returns in order to limit selection for specific run timing. These measures should help limit the impacts of any hatchery fish, which may spawn in the wild.

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 55

Operation of the North Fork Dam trap is such that delayed migration resulting in fallback and downstream spawning by wild fish, in less suitable areas where hatchery fish may also spawn, is minimized. The trap is checked, and fish are sorted and released frequently during the peak of adult migration. Also, special care is used when handling all adult fish to ensure that fish are released unharmed and to limit stress, which may inadvertently affect spawning success.

Minto Fish Facility The use of North Santiam stock (random selection, egg takes throughout the run) will reduce adverse genetic or ecological effects and maximize the genetic diversity of the hatchery stock. The removal of most hatchery fish from known natural spawning areas will reduce interbreeding but will not be implemented in the near term to encourage additional natural spawning to occur.

South Santiam Hatchery Only hatchery-produced fish shall be used as broodstock for the SAFE spring Chinook program. Collection of all brood fish is random, with sex ratio and timing representative of the overall return to Foster Dam.

SECTION 7. BROODSTOCK COLLECTION

7.1) Life-history stage to be collected (adults, eggs, or juveniles).

Returning adults (and jacks) are collected and spawned for broodstock.

7.2) Collection or sampling design.

Clackamas Hatchery The estimated goal of broodstock collection for the SAFE spring Chinook program is 105 adults (35 male 70 female). This broodstock goal accounts for pre-spawn mortalities. All brood will be collected from adult fish that swim into the trap at Clackamas Hatchery or, in an emergency, from fish collected at North Fork Dam. Adults will be collected at a 1:2 male to female ratio throughout the entire run.

Minto Fish Facility Minto trap opens in August and adults are collected throughout the run until early October. Early returning fish are believed to hold below the trap until the trap opens, and are included in the broodstock. Fish returning to the collection facility are mixed and randomly selected for spawning, which occurs on several different days from the second week in September through the first week in October. Throughout this time period, and depending on how many fish appear to be holding in the river below the trap, some of the excess hatchery adults are transported above the reservoir for release. Unmarked fish not intended to be used for brood are transported to the Little North Fork Santiam for release or passed above the trap as soon as practical.

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 56

South Santiam Hatchery Adults returning voluntarily to the trap at Foster Dam (and used for broodstock purposes) are collected throughout the run, and transferred to South Santiam holding ponds until spawning. Foster Dam fish trap typically opens in early May, and closes for the year in mid-to-late October.

7.3) Identity.

Clackamas Hatchery Naturally produced fish are identified by the presence of a fully developed adipose fin. Fish with an adipose fin are tested for CWTs. If no CWT is present then the fish are assumed to be wild and returned to the river at the upper boat ramp in McIver State Park. However, due to marking error, up to 3% of un-marked fish may be hatchery fish that were poorly marked. Minto Fish Facility (a) Methods for identifying target populations (if more than one population may be present). A portion (at least 30,000 and up to100%) of smolts are coded wire tagged (CWT) and 100% are adipose clipped. CWT data allow individual hatchery stocks to be differentiated based upon their tag code; hence, the number of out-of-basin stray adults returning to Minto Pond (and alternate collection facilities) can be quantified. Over the past 10 years, the stray rate has averaged 8%.

(b) Methods for identifying hatchery origin fish from naturally spawned fish. Beginning with brood year 1996, all hatchery reared spring Chinook have been marked with an adipose fin clip. The external mark allows hatchery origin fish to be distinguished from naturally spawned fish. Also, the otolith has been marked for identification of hatchery fish.

South Santiam Hatchery All hatchery-produced adult returns are ad-clipped (100%), and 11% with CWT marking.

7.4) Proposed number to be collected:

7.4.1) Program goal:

Clackamas Hatchery For the SAFE spring Chinook program, proposed brood collection goal is 105 (35 male, 70 female). All brood will be collected from adult fish that swim into the trap at Clackamas Hatchery or are collected at North Fork Dam. Adults will be collected at a 1:2 male to female ratio throughout the entire run.

Minto Fish Facility The goal for the SAFE program is to collect 380 adults (190 male, 190 female) at a male to female spawning ratio 1:1.

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 57

South Santiam Hatchery The South Santiam Hatchery goal is to have 500 spawning adults with a 1:1 male-to- female spawning ratio.

7.4.2) Broodstock collection levels for the last twelve years (e.g. 1990-2001), or for most recent years available.

Table 7.4.2-1. Past spring Chinook broodstock collection level at Clackamas Hatchery, including SAFE program (2003-2014 brood years). Adults Year Males Females Jacks Eggs Juveniles 2003 2,267 2,670 399 1,644,152 2004 5,880 5,235 116 1,572,066 2005 3,126 3,565 101 1,731,216 2006 3,589 3,655 43 1,601,680 2007 2,729 3,224 153 1,714,760 2008 2,371 2,625 58 1,711,976 2009 1,182 1,200 458 1,831,516 2010 2,766 2,880 69 1,628,364 2011 808 846 124 1,585,552 2012 627 842 46 1,511,372 2013 935 891 226 1,259,708 2014 1,549 1,279 144 1,193,611

Table 7.4.2-3. Minto Facility spring Chinook broodstock collection level, including SAFE program, brood year 2003-2014. Adults Year Males Females Jacks Eggs Juveniles 2003 2,405 2,006 30 1,524,328 2004 2,433 1,583 36 1,284,480 2005 1,033 760 19 1,072,977 2006 2,221 1,406 9 1,206,000 2007 964 983 42 1,274,800 2008 646 428 58 1,119,800 2009 1,518 686 151 1,463,610 2010 2,780 2,112 56 1,253,800 2011 446 379 28 1,282,660 2012 358 476 9 1,253,872 2013 1,489 1,301 379 1,869,600 2014 2,134 1,495 163 1,926,000

Table 7.4.2-4. South Santiam Hatchery spring Chinook broodstock collection level, including SAFE program, 2003-2014 brood years. Adults Year Males Females Jacks Eggs Juveniles 2003 3,345 2,746 112 2,348,400 2004 5,574 4,967 59 2,149,543 2005 2,003 1,677 112 2,307,600 2006 2,047 1,605 17 2,450,110 2007 643 742 78 2,000,750

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 58

Adults Year Males Females Jacks Eggs Juveniles 2008 866 669 690 1,713,300 2009 1,758 836 1,052 1,507,230 2010 5,112 3,688 581 1,598,700 2011 4,952 3,732 408 1,698,708 2012 4,451 3,687 174 1,610,400 2013 2,038 1,469 769 1,610,200 2014 1,839 1,281 304 1,920,200

7.5) Disposition of hatchery-origin fish collected in surplus of broodstock needs.

Disposition of excess adult fish will be carried out according to the mandates under the ODFW Fish Hatchery Management Policy. This includes but is not limited to supplying fish for tribal ceremonial and substance use, recycling adults downstream to provide additional fishing opportunity, sell to provide revenues to support hatchery programs, give to charitable food share programs, and placement of carcasses in natural spawning and rearing areas.

Minto Fish Facility Surplus adults may be released immediately above Minto Dam in years when escapement levels of naturally produced fish are insufficient to fully seed the available spawning habitat (between Minto and Big Cliff Dams). Since 2001, surplus hatchery-origin adults have been outplanted to the Breitenbush and North Santiam Rivers above Detroit Dam as part of an ongoing effort to determine the feasibility of re-establishing self-sustaining natural production in the upper basin. A risk/benefit analysis of moving marked and unmarked spring Chinook above USACE flood control projects in the Willamette Valley, including Detroit Dams, is described by Ziller et al. (2002).

Surplus fish may also be returned to the North Santiam River immediately below Minto dam, recycled through downstream recreational fisheries, and/or killed for recovery of coded wire tags. Spawned fish carcasses are distributed within the North Santiam system for nutrient enrichment purposes.

7.6) Fish transportation and holding methods.

Clackamas Hatchery See Sections 5.2 and 5.3. The adult fish kept for brood are held in two 10’ x 60’ x 51” holding ponds at Clackamas Hatchery. Adult spring Chinook trapped at North Fork Dam are transported via a 1000 gallon fish liberation truck equipped with oxygen and aeration to Clackamas Hatchery. Live fish transported by Clackamas Hatchery personnel for recycling downstream to expand fishing opportunities will be hauled in a 2,000 gal oxygenated and insulated liberation truck.

South Santiam Hatchery See Sections 5.2 and 5.3

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 59

Minto Fish Facility See section 5.2 and 5.3 for transport tanks that are used and holding containers. MS-222 or CO2 are used as an anesthetic before hauling for easy of handling and stress to fish, no other chemicals used.

7.7) Describe fish health maintenance and sanitation procedures applied.

Clackamas Hatchery  Integrated Hatchery Operations Team (IHOT), Pacific Northwest Fish Health Protection committee (PNFHPC), and ODFW’s Fish Health Management Policy are followed.  Adult Chinook salmon are treated with 1:3,500 hydrogen peroxide solution, three to five times a week, to control and minimize fungus.  Adults are injected with erythromycin and oxytetracycline prior to holding.  If mortality is present, it is removed daily.  Necropsies are performed on pre-spawner mortalities to determine the cause of death.  All equipment is disinfected with Iodophor between uses. Fish transport tanks are disinfected between the hauling of different fish lots.  High water quality is maintained

Minto Fish Facility Broodstock eggs are treated three times a week with formalin, until 600 temperature units have been attained, to prevent/control fungus. Hatchery equipment and tools are regularly disinfected; the hatchery has separate tools for each bank of incubators. ODFW fish health staff does routine monthly samples at the hatchery and all females used for broodstock are individually screened for BKD.

South Santiam Hatchery Upon collection broodstock are anesthetized with CO2 and injected with antibiotics (oxytetracycline) and erythromycin prior to placement in the holding pond. Also broodstock are treated with H2O2 three days per week for fungus control. Ponds are inspected daily for mortality and dead fish are removed immediately. Fish health specialist check health status monthly and treat fish as necessary. The new facility at Foster will allow for the use of CO2 or AQUI-SE. High water quality is maintained to provide healthy environment in holding pond(s).

Typical medications used include: Anesthetics – MS222 or CO2; Salve – Iodophor; Antibiotics – Erythromycin and Oxytetracycline.

7.8) Disposition of carcasses.

Clackamas Hatchery All spawned carcasses are used for stream enrichment consistent with Oregon Department of Environmental Quality requirements, management plans, and pathology

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 60

constraints identified in OAR 635-0070549. All prespawn mortality with be sent to a landfill.

Minto Fish Facility After Department needs are met, grade one and grade two spring Chinook carcasses are used to satisfy tribal agreements. Surplus spring Chinook carcasses have not been sold since 1994. Spawned carcasses are currently used for stream enrichment. Holding pond mortalities are buried on-site or in a landfill. Un-spawned carcasses (surplus brood stock) are used for stream enrichment or rendered (ODFW 1999).

South Santiam Hatchery After Department needs are met, grade 1 and grade 2 spring Chinook carcasses are used to meet tribal agreement. Additional surpluses of high quality fish may be sold through competitive bid process to generate revenue for hatchery operations. Spawned out carcasses or fish killed for CWT recovery are used for stream enrichment in the South Santiam and Calapooia basins. Holding pond mortalities are buried on-site or used for stream enrichments.

7.9) Indicate risk aversion measures that will be applied to minimize the likelihood for adverse genetic or ecological effects to listed natural fish resulting from the broodstock collection program.

The risk of adverse ecological or genetic effects to listed fish will be minimized by hatchery management practices described in this document and following Fish Hatchery Management, Fish Health Management Policy, Native Fish Conservation and Recovery Policies.

SECTION 8. MATING

8.1) Selection method.

Clackamas Hatchery Spring Chinook broodstock are selected throughout the run and are spawned at a 1:2 (male-to-female) spawning ratio. Ripe fish selected at random from the pooled brood population.

Minto Fish Facility Fish are selected and paired at random in order to minimize selective pressures from hatchery practices. Broodstock collection endeavors to represent the genetic variability of the stock by taking an unbiased, representative sample with respect to run timing, size, sex, age, and other phenotypic traits identified as important for long-term fitness (IHOT 1995). Only North Santiam spring Chinook are used for broodstock.

South Santiam Hatchery Ripe fish are selected at random in order to minimize artificial selective pressures.

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 61

Broodstock collection endeavors to represent the genetic variability of the stock by taking unbiased representative population characteristics with respect to run timing, age, sex, size, and other phenotypic traits identified as important for long-term fitness (IHOT 1995). Only South Santiam stock are used for broodstock.

8.2) Males.

Clackamas Hatchery All males are spawned at a 1:2 ratio with females. This ratio is used because of the size of the gene pool in the hatchery population, and due to space limitations in adult holding facilities. Precocious males are not used in the broodstock. Back-up males are not used in the spawning protocol. All salmon are killed prior to spawning. Milt is placed into a cup prior to egg fertilization.

Minto Fish Facility The typical sex ratio of returning adults is almost 60% male to 40% female; although in 2007, an unusually high percentage of females returned. The typical spawning sex ratio for this program is a 1:1 male-to-female. Jacks may or may not be used, depending on availability at the time of spawning or returning jack population characteristics. Males are not re-used unless needed for research or other purposes.

South Santiam Hatchery The typical spawning sex ratio for this program is a 1:1 male-to-female. Jacks may or may not be used, depending on availability at the time of spawning or returning jack population characteristics. Males are not re-used unless needed for research or other purposes.

8.3) Fertilization.

Clackamas Hatchery Eggs and sperm are fertilized according to a 1 x 2 spawning matrix. Gametes are pooled prior to fertilization. IHOT, PNFHPC, and state guidelines are followed. Disinfection procedures that prevent pathogen transmission between stocks of fish are implemented during spawning.

Minto Fish Facility Broodstock are humanely killed and bled prior to spawning. Eggs from one female are fertilized with sperm from one male (1:1 spawning ratio). Males are not re-used unless enough ripe males are not available. Eggs from one female or two females are placed in each Heath tray. If two are placed in one tray and one comes up BKD positive both are culled. Fertilized eggs are subjected to a 10-minute Iodophor bath for disinfection both at Minto prior to water hardening and in the Heath trays at Marion Forks. Trays and egg batches are individually marked so eggs can be discarded if BKD tests are positive. Eggs are transferred from Minto to Marion Forks in mesh bags (they are spawned into these bags) that are in coolers with wet burlap and ice.

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 62

If the hatchery reduces the number of eggs retained below the amount of green eggs taken, a proportional amount of each male/female cross is culled so that the gene pool of the brood is representative of the parental stock. Exceptions may occur if there is a high degree of disease or epidemics associated with certain parents or if a late egg take cannot be caught up with TUs in an effective manner. If this occurs, offspring of diseased parents may be culled to maximize long-term survival of the brood.

South Santiam Hatchery Broodstock are humanely killed and bled prior to spawning. Eggs from one female are fertilized with sperm from one male (1:1 spawning ratio). Males are not re-used unless enough ripe males are not available. Eggs from one female or two females are placed in each Heath tray. If two are placed in one tray and one comes up BKD positive both are culled. Trays and egg batches are individually marked so eggs can be discarded if BKD tests are positive.

If the hatchery reduces the number of eggs retained below the amount of green eggs taken, a proportional amount of each male/female cross is culled so that the gene pool of the brood is representative of the parental stock. Exceptions may occur if there is a high degree of disease or epidemics associated with certain parents or if a late egg take cannot be caught up with TUs in an effective manner. If this occurs, offspring of diseased parents may be culled to maximize long-term survival of the brood. In addition to Department-wide fish disease control and disease prevention programs, South Santiam Hatchery monitors fish health, therapeutic and prophylactic treatments, and sanitation activities (IHOT 1995).

8.4) Cryopreserved gametes. Cryopreserved gametes are not used in any the hatcheries.

8.5) Indicate risk aversion measures that will be applied to minimize the likelihood for adverse genetic or ecological effects to listed natural fish resulting from the mating scheme.

 The mating scheme used will help to reduce the risk of loss of within-population genetic diversity.  Fish are selected and spawned randomly from the broodstock population in specified male to female spawning ratio.  All females are sampled for BKD during spawning. Eggs from females that test positive will be destroyed. Ovarian fluid and tissues from 60 females are sampled for IHN, with additional sub-sampling of ovarian fluids done if determined necessary by ODFW Pathology. If there is no IHN present, continued rearing is authorized. If IHN is detected, eggs and fingerlings will be monitored to see if they contract the virus.  Green eggs are water-hardened in Iodophor. Shipped eyed eggs are disinfected at the receiving station.

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 63

SECTION 9. INCUBATION AND REARING

9.1) Incubation:

9.1.1) Number of eggs taken and survival rates to eye-up and/or ponding.

Annual egg take estimates and early survival rates of SAFE spring Chinook are shown in Tables 9.1.1-1 – 9.1.1-4. No data of egg survival for Big Creek Hatchery are available, as the facility shall be used for egg incubation beginning BY 2015.

Table 9.1.1-1. Egg take, and early survival rates of spring Chinook at Clackamas Hatchery 2003- 2014 brood years. % Egg-Eyed % Eyed-Ponding Brood Year Egg Take Survival Survival 2003 1,644,152 84.6 * 2004 1,572,066 93.1 * 2005 1,731,216 80.9 * 2006 1,601,680 90.5 * 2007 1,714,760 94.2 * 2008 1,711,976 96.8 * 2009 1,831,516 93.3 * 2010 1,628,364 96.1 * 2011 1,585,552 95.0 * 2012 1,511,372 95.2 * 2013 1,259,708 93.2 * 2014 1,193,611 92.4 * *Eyed eggs were transferred to other facilities for final incubation

Table 9.1.1-2. Egg take, and early survival rates of spring Chinook at Marion Forks Hatchery 2003- 2014 brood years. % Egg-Eyed % Eyed-Ponding Brood Year Egg Take Survival Survival 2003 1,524,328 78.9 99.1 2004 1,284,480 71.0 94.6 2005 1,072,977 82.7 96.9 2006 1,206,000 80.1 98.9 2007 1,274,800 82.9 97.7 2008 1,119,800 87.9 99.0 2009 1,463,610 89.0 98.4 2010 1,253,800 84.4 98.0 2011 1,282,660 94.6 97.3 2012 1,253,872 93.9 96.7 2013 1,869,600 91.8 96.6 2014 1,926,000 89.2 91.9

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 64

Table 9.1.1-3. Egg take, and early survival rates of spring Chinook at South Santiam Hatchery 2003- 2014 brood years. % Egg-Eyed %Eyed-Ponding Brood Year Egg Take Survival Survival 2003 2,348,400 93.5 * 2004 2,149,543 96.1 * 2005 2,307,600 97.7 * 2006 2,450,110 98.2 * 2007 2,000,750 97.6 * 2008 1,713,300 96.8 * 2009 1,507,230 96.7 * 2010 1,598,700 98.1 * 2011 1,698,708 98.9 * 2012 1,610,400 98.0 * 2013 1,610,200 98.2 * 2014 1,920,200 96.9 * *Eyed eggs were transferred to other facilities for final incubation

Table 9.1.1-4. Early survival rates of spring Chinook at Gnat Creek Hatchery 2007-2014 brood years. %Eyed-Ponding Brood Year Survival 2003 97.6 2004 97.9 2005 97.2 2006 97.5 2007 95.7 2008 97.5 2009 98.0 2010 98.8 2011 98.7 2012 98.9 2013 99.0 2014 97.9

Table 9.1.1-6. Early survival rates of spring Chinook at Bonneville Hatchery 2012-2014 brood years. %Eyed-Ponding Brood Year Survival 2012 98.1 2013 98.7 2014 97.9

9.1.2) Cause for, and disposition of surplus egg takes.

Clackamas Hatchery  Measures are taken to only collect the number of eggs necessary to attain annual egg take goals. If additional eggs are taken, it is anticipated that this would not exceed 10% more than the total needed for production (IHOT 1996). ODFW will consult

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 65

with NOAA Fisheries if this occurs.  Extra eggs are taken to compensate for the potential loss attributed to BKD culling. Excess eggs are frozen and disposed of in the landfill.  Eggs are not culled randomly over all segments of egg-take.  Eggs are culled at Clackamas Hatchery once for BKD and a second time if numbers exceed program goals.  Eggs are culled based on a positive reading for BKD using ELISA.  Juveniles are normally not culled.  Families are not culled to minimize family size variation.  Families are initially incubated individually at Clackamas Hatchery to allow for BKD culling. After eye-up and shocking, eggs are mixed together for shipment to other hatcheries.

Minto Fish Facility This program takes additional eggs to ensure enough BKD-negative eggs for production is achieved. Any excess eggs or BKD culled eggs are disinfected and buried.

South Santiam Hatchery This program takes additional eggs to ensure enough BKD-negative eggs for production is achieved. Any excess eggs or BKD culled eggs are disinfected and buried.

9.1.3) Loading densities applied during incubation.

Clackamas Hatchery Integrated Hatchery Operations Team (IHOT) species-specific incubation recommendations are followed for water quality, flows and incubator capacities. Eggs are incubated under conditions that result in generally equal survival of all segments of the population to ponding. Survival is equal because the incubation equipment and methods are the same for all segments Loading per tray: 8,000-10,000 egg/tray, flow: 5 gallons per minute.

Marion Forks Hatchery Egg loading density is 8,000 eggs/tray, flow 5 gpm.

South Santiam Hatchery Egg loading density is 8,000 eggs/tray, flow 5 gpm.

Big Creek Hatchery Beginning BY 2015, Big Creek Hatchery shall be used for SAFE spring Chinook egg incubation and early rearing. Egg loading density is expected to be 8,000 eggs/tray, at a flow of 5 gpm.

Gnat Creek Hatchery Egg loading density is 8,000 per incubator tray.

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 66

9.1.4) Incubation conditions.

Clackamas Hatchery Water temperatures are recorded daily. Well water averages 52oF. River water ranges from 45-56oF. Temperatures may be reduced by 8oF to even-up separate lots of eggs, during early incubation. DO is monitored weekly, and generally falls within 9-10 ppm

Marion Forks Hatchery Water to the incubator is monitored for temperature with a 7-day thermograph. The incubation temperature varies from 38-42oF. Trays are monitored for silt buildup and cleaned as necessary. Dissolved oxygen readings are not regularly taken because the cold water used for incubation always holds adequate dissolved oxygen level. Temperature Units are also equipped with thermal changes at embryo developmental stages and that are required for otolith marking programs.

Big Creek Hatchery Incubation facilities are described in Section 5.4. IHOT species-specific incubation recommendations shall be followed for loading density, water quality, flows, and temperature. Eggs will be monitored when needed to determine fertilization efficiency and embryonic development. During eyed egg incubation period, water temperature could be around 47oF (from spring water). Flow through the incubation trays shall be 5 gpm in the vertical stacks, 10 or 12 gpm in the deep troughs, and 12 gpm in the shallow troughs. Dissolved oxygen at Big Creek Hatchery water generally remains between 7-10 ppm, but is only monitored intermittently. Loading densities and flows shall be such that D.O. does not become a problem at this facility. Temperature shall be monitored daily.

South Santiam Hatchery Water flows are monitored by an alarm system. Temperature is monitored daily and is controlled so that temperatures remain below 56oF. Dissolved oxygen levels remain at or near saturation throughout the eyed stage. Silt is not normally a problem, however, water trays can be drained to remove silt if necessary prior to and during the eyed stage.

Gnat Creek Hatchery At Gnat Creek Hatchery, eggs are incubated from the eyed stage to swim-up fry in Heath vertical stack incubators. Water inflow is maintained at approximately ~5.0 gpm per stack. The IHOT species-specific incubation recommendations are followed for water quality, flows, and incubator capacities. Averages of monthly water temperatures during incubation (minimum, average and maximum) since 1995 are shown in Table 9.1.4-1. Temperature is monitored via a thermograph at the water source. The hatchery has not had issues with siltation during incubation.

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 67

9.1.4-1. Averages of monthly water temperatures (minimum, average, and maximum) during incubation season at Gnat Creek hatchery between 1995 and 2003 (F). November December January Minimum 40 39 39 Average 45 43 43 Maximum 50 47 47

Backup Facility: McKenzie Hatchery Water temperatures are monitored with thermographs. Chilled water is used to otolith mark all fry. Silt management is accomplished by visual inspection and rodding of trays when needed. Cumulative temperatures are recorded daily.

9.1.5) Ponding.

Marion Forks Hatchery Fish are ponded at between 1,650-1,850 TUs, when 99% button-up is attained. At Marion Forks Hatchery, ponding of button-ups occurs between mid-February and mid- March.

Big Creek Hatchery When TUs approach 1,600 then fry are inspected frequently to determine if the majority are completely “buttoned-up” and suitable for ponding. Actual accumulated TUs at ponding can range from 1,550 to 1,650. Rearing facilities are described in Section 5.5.

South Santiam Hatchery All eyed eggs of spring Chinook salmon for the SAFE program are transferred to Gnat Creek Hatchery for additional incubation and ponding/rearing.

Gnat Creek Hatchery Rearing facilities are described in Section 5.5. At Gnat Creek Hatchery, swim-up fry are typically ponded in January at 1,250-1,350 fish per pound (fpp). At Gnat Creek, fry are ponded to indoor cement troughs. Temperature units are monitored, but ponding is based on visual inspection of yolk-sac absorption.

Backup Facility: Bonneville Hatchery The procedures used for determining when fry are ponded include:  Fry are removed from incubation units when 80-90% of observed fry have yolk-sac material that is 80-90% utilized and contained within body cavity ("button-up");  Fry are ponded based on visual inspection of the amount of yolk remaining (with temperature units used as a guideline);  Eggs are not incubated in a manner that allows volitional ponding of fry.

Fry are typically ponded in late December at about 1,600 TU, size at ponding averages

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 68

1,400 fish per pound (lengths not taken). Fry are force ponded.

9.1.6) Fish health maintenance and monitoring.

Clackamas Hatchery Eggs are treated with formalin (to prevent fungus) from green egg through eyed-egg development. Treatments are administered every other day at 1,666 ppm, for 15 minutes. After eye development (~550 TU), eggs are “shocked”, picked, and enumerated. Eyed eggs shipped to other hatcheries are disinfected upon arrival.

South Santiam Hatchery At South Santiam Hatchery, fish health monitoring is conducted monthly by ODFW pathologists. Spring Chinook eggs are received in the eyed stage so no treatment for fungus is required. Eggs are monitored daily and dead eggs are removed as needed before fry are ready to pond. Culled eggs are disposed of in the facility dumpster.

Marion Forks Hatchery The eggs are treated with formalin three times a week until pre-hatching begins . Mortalities are picked by machine after shocking and handpicked after hatching and ponding. There have been no significant problems in terms of yolk-sac malformation.

Big Creek Hatchery IHOT, Pacific Northwest Fish Health Protection Committee (PNFHPC), and state or tribal guidelines are followed for fish health inspections. Disinfection procedures are implemented during incubation that prevents pathogen transmission between stocks of fish on site. Eggs shall be monitored when needed to determine fertilization efficiency and embryonic development. Following eye-up stage, eggs will be inventoried and dead or undeveloped eggs be removed and disposed of as described in the disease control guidelines. Dead or culled eggs will be discarded in a manner that prevents transmission of disease to the local watershed.

Gnat Creek Hatchery At Gnat Creek Hatchery, fish health monitoring is conducted monthly by ODFW pathologists. Eggs are received as eyed eggs and are not treated chemically for fungus control. Eggs are picked initially upon arrival at the hatchery and on a weekly basis thereafter. At the sac fry stage, they may be culled once to twice per week. Culled eggs are frozen and disposed of at the landfill.

9.1.7) Indicate risk aversion measures that will be applied to minimize the likelihood for adverse genetic and ecological effects to listed fish during incubation.

ODFW hatcheries are operated in compliance with ODFW’s Fish Health Management Policy and the Integrated Hatchery Operations Team (IHOT) fish health guidelines.

Clackamas Hatchery Eggs are incubated on well water or treated river water to prevent exposure to disease.

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 69

Eggs are kept isolated by family group. Water supplies and the power supply are alarmed to notify hatchery personnel if a failure occurs. Water supplies are hooked to a back-up generator, in case of a power failure. Hatchery staff are available 24 hr/day.

Gnat Creek Hatchery Eggs will be incubated using the best techniques available to insure the highest possible survival to meet eyed egg production goal. Culled eggs are disposed of in a manner that prevents disease transmission to the receiving watershed.

Marion Forks Hatchery Due to the hatchery intake location, major silt build-ups do not occur very often at this facility, eggs are treated for fungus, and densities are kept at safe levels. The incubators are checked at least twice a day for any problems that may occur. Culling of eggs will be done in such a way as to reduce each family group equally.

South Santiam Hatchery Eggs will be incubated using the best techniques available to insure the highest possible survival to meet eyed egg production goals. Culled eggs are disposed of in a manner that prevents disease transmission to the receiving watershed.

9.2) Rearing.

9.2.1) Provide survival rate data (average program performance) by hatchery life stage (fry to fingerling; fingerling to smolt) for the most recent twelve years, or for years dependable data are available.

Table 9.2.1-1. Fry-to-fingerling survival of spring Chinook at hatcheries involved in the SAFE spring Chinook program. Release Bonneville Gnat Marion McKenzie Big Creek* Year Creek Forks 2003 n/a 98.8% 98.8% 98.3% n/a 2004 n/a 98.9% 99.4% 98.3% n/a 2005 85.3% 98.9% 98.9% 97.8% n/a 2006 97.8% 99.0% 95.8% 96.2% n/a 2007 98.9% 98.8% 90.0% 95.0% n/a 2008 95.8% 98.9% 98.9% 98.9% n/a 2009 n/a 95.6% 99.0% 99.0% n/a 2010 n/a 97.6% 98.9% 98.2% n/a 2011 n/a 98.9% 98.6% 98.3% n/a 2012 n/a 98.3% 99.2% 98.3% n/a 2013 97.6% 98.7% 99.0% 98.7% n/a 2014 96.9% 99.3% 99.6% 98.4% n/a *Big Creek Hatchery has no data, as the facility shall be used from brood year 2015.

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 70

Table 9.2.1-2. Fingerling-to-smolt/transfer survival of spring Chinook at hatcheries involved in the SAFE spring Chinook program. Release Bonneville Gnat Creek Marion McKenzie Net Pens* Year Forks 2003 n/a 99.7% 99.2% 97.2% 96.7% 2004 n/a 99.5% 99.1% 95.6% 98.3% 2005 n/a 99.4% 98.7% 97.4% 97.5% 2006 97.8% 99.5% 98.7% 96.4% 98.1% 2007 n/a 99.6% 99.7% 98.4% 98.2% 2008 n/a 99.7% 99.1% 95.4% 99.6% 2009 n/a 98.9% 99.7% 98.8% 96.3% 2010 n/a 99.1% 99.7% 99.0% 99.5% 2011 n/a 99.6% 99.8% 98.5% 99.5% 2012 n/a 99.1% 99.8% 98.8% 99.4% 2013 99.7% 99.6% 99.8% 99.2% 99.6% 2014 99.7% 99.7% 99.6% 97.0% 81.9% *Received as fingerlings from Gnat Creek Hatchery. Over winter groups only.

9.2.2) Density and loading criteria (goals and actual levels).

Gnat Creek Hatchery The juvenile rearing density and loading guidelines used at Gnat Creek Hatchery are based on standardized agency guidelines, life-stage specific survival studies conducted at other facilities, staff experience (e.g. trial and error) and other criteria. The IHOT standards are followed for water quality, predator control measures to provide the necessary security for the cultured stock, loading, and density. Fry are initially ponded at 1.0 pounds/ft3. Once fish are moved to the rearing pond, rearing densities do not exceed 0.5 pounds/ft3.

Marion Forks Hatchery Density targets from fry to fingerling are not to exceed 4 lbs/gallon of inflow when the fingerlings go from inside to outside ponds it is usually below 3 lbs/gallon. Once outside, fingerlings are split so levels do not exceed 10 lbs/gallon. Highest densities (just before release) are about 11 lbs/gallon.

Lower Columbia Net Pens The juvenile rearing density and loading guidelines used in the net pens are based on standardized agency guidelines, life-stage specific survival studies conducted at other facilities, staff experience (e.g. trial and error) and other criteria. The IHOT standards are followed for water quality, predator control measures to provide the necessary security for the cultured stock, loading and density. Fingerlings are ponded at 0.28 lbs/ft3 (goal ~ 0.25 lbs/ft3). Smolts are ponded at 0.61 lbs/ft3 (goal ~ 0.65 lbs/ft3).

Backup Facility: Bonneville Hatchery Density and loading levels differ by size of fish, size of pond and time of year (water

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 71

temperature). The maximum density for fingerlings is 2.5 lbs/cu ft. in a 20' X 80' raceway. For smolts, the maximum density is 4.4 lbs/cu ft. Actual densities rarely hit these levels. The juvenile rearing density and loading guidelines used at the facility are based on staff experience (e.g. trial and error). The IHOT standards are followed for water quality, predator control measures to provide the necessary security for the cultured stock, loading and density.

9.2.3) Fish rearing conditions.

Gnat Creek Hatchery Ponds are monitored daily by crew. The crew is watching for signs of stress, disease, water quality, and general fish health behavior. Pond mortality is picked and recorded daily. Dead fish are frozen and disposed of. Water quality is monitored under the prescribed 300J general NPDES permit. Fish are reared February through October. Temperature is monitored via a thermograph at the water source. Averages of monthly water temperatures (minimum, average, and maximum) are displayed in Table 19. Difficulties with low dissolved oxygen levels or super-saturation have never been an issue at Gnat Creek Hatchery.

Table 9.2.3-1. Averages of monthly water temperatures (F) (minimum, average, and maximum) of rearing water source at Gnat Creek Hatchery, 2009-20015. Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sep Oct Min 37.3 37.8 40.5 42.4 46.6 49.8 50.8 48.7 44 Avg 41.7 43.2 45.3 47.6 52.4 55.8 56 53.3 48.6 Max 45.1 48.2 50 52.2 56.8 60.1 60.4 57.6 53.2

Marion Forks Hatchery Pond monitoring is done daily at feeding time, while personnel are observing for signs of stress, disease, water quality, and general fish behavior. Pond mortality is picked as needed. Water quality is monitored through our individual DEQ permit.

Lower Columbia Net Pens In the net pens, fish are fed daily-recommended rations based on water temperature and body weight. Pens are cleaned and/or changed as needed to ensure adequate flow. Excess feed and feces do no accumulate in the pens. Benthic monitoring is conducted seasonally under and adjacent to the net pens. Results to date indicate waste accumulation below the net pens is minimal and does not adversely affect invertebrate communities (North et al. 2004).

Backup Facility: Bonneville Hatchery Ponds are monitored daily by crew. The crew is watching for signs of stress, disease, water quality, and general fish health behavior. Pond mortality is picked and recorded daily. Water quality is monitored under the prescribed 300J general NPDES permit. April through September water temperatures are usually in the mid 40 degrees to mid 60 degrees, October through March water temperatures are usually in the mid 30 degrees to

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 72

mid 40 degrees. Ponds are cleaned weekly.

9.2.4) Indicate biweekly or monthly fish growth information (average program performance), including length, weight, and condition factor data collected during rearing, if available.

Table 9.2.4-1. Average fish growth information for spring Chinook reared at hatcheries involved in the SAFE spring Chinook program (2009-2014). Bonneville Gnat Creek Marion Forks McKenzie Month Weight (fpp) Weight (fpp) Weight (fpp) Weight (fpp) December 1,010 January 360 1,131 1012 February 215 702 1,208 630 March 172 390 808 355 April 139 202 483 197 May 99 129 249 117 June 68 86 103 73 July 39 62 52 44 August 29 42 30 28 September 19 27 21 20 October 12 20 17 15 November 18 16 14 December 18 14.7 13.1 January 16 14.4 11.9 February 15 13.7 11.6 March 12.7

Table 9.2.4-2. Average fish growth information for spring Chinook reared at Blind Slough and Youngs Bay net pens, 2009-2014. Blind Slough Youngs Bay Rearing Period Weight (fpp) Weight (fpp) October 23.0 21.1 November 20.3 19.5 December 18.8 16.5 January 17.9 14.3 February 15.4 13.0

9.2.5) Indicate monthly fish growth rate and energy reserve data (average program performance), if available.

See Section 9.2.4 for growth rate data. Energy reserve data are not available.

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 73

9.2.6) Indicate food type used, daily application schedule, feeding rate range (e.g. % B.W./day and lbs/gpm inflow), and estimates of total food conversion efficiency during rearing (average program performance).

Bonneville Hatchery All fish are started on Bio-Oregon dry feed. They are fed on demand, six to ten times a day. At 500 f/lb, they are put on a schedule and fed a set amount per day. Fish are fed daily, multiple times if needed to get their daily amounts. Feed is stored under proper conditions as described by IHOT guidelines. Food types used include: #0 BioVita Starter from ponding to 500 f/lb, #1 BioVita Starter 500 f/lb to 300 f/lb, #2 BioVita Starter 300 f/lb to 150 f/lb, 1.2 mm BioClarks Fry 150 f/lb to 30 f/lb, 2.0 mm BioClarks Fry 30 f/lb to 11 f/lb, 2.5 mm BioClarks Fry 11 f/lb to transfer.

Table 9.2.6-1. Feed types, application schedule and conversion rates of SAFE spring Chinook by season at Bonneville Hatchery. Application Schedule Conversion Rearing Period Food Type (#feedings/day) Rate Dec-Jan #0 BioVita Starter 6-8 0.35 Jan-Feb #1 BioVita Starter 6-8 0.44 Feb-Apr #2 BioVita Starter 6-8 0.84 Apr-Jun 1.2mm BioClarks Fry 6-8 0.93 Jun-Jul 1.5mm BioClarks Fry 6-8 0.66 Jul-transfer 2.0mm BioClarks Fry 6-8 0.65

Gnat Creek Hatchery Food types, application schedules, feeding rates, and average conversion efficiencies of SAFE spring Chinook at the Gnat Creek hatchery can be found in Table 9.2.6-2.

Table 9.2.6-2. Food type, application schedule, and conversion rates by life stage of SAFE spring Chinook reared at Gnat Creek Hatchery. Application Schedule Conversion Rearing Period Food Type (#feedings/day) Rate Jan-Mar #0 BioClarks Starter 4-7 0.45 Mar-Apr #1 BioClarks Starter 4-7 0.62 Apr-May #2 BioClarks Starter 4-7 0.72 May-Jul 1.2mm BioClarks Fry 1 0.87 Jun-Aug 1.5mm BioClarks Fry 1 0.87 Aug-Dec 2.0mm BioClarks Fry 1 1.01 Jan-Mar 2.5mm BioClarks Fry 1 1.13

Marion Forks Hatchery Food types, application schedules, feeding rates, and average conversion efficiencies of SAFE spring Chinook at Marion Forks Hatchery can be found in Table 9.2.6-3.

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 74

Table 9.2.6-3. Food type, application schedule, and conversion rates by life stage of SAFE spring Chinook reared at Marion Forks Hatchery. Application Schedule Conversion Rearing Period Food Type (#feedings/day) Rate Feb-Apr #0 BioVita Starter demand 0.94 Apr-May #1 BioVita Starter demand 0.89 May-Jun #2 BioVita Starter demand 0.74 Jun-Jul 1.2mm BioVita Fry demand 0.67 Jul 1.5mm BioVita Fry demand 0.96 Jul-Sep 2.0mm BioClarks Fry demand 0.92 Sep-transfer 2.5mm BioClarks Fry demand 1.79

McKenzie Hatchery Food types, application schedules, feeding rates, and average conversion efficiencies of SAFE spring Chinook at McKenzie Hatchery can be found in Table 9.2.6-4.

Table 9.2.6-4. Food type, application schedule, and conversion rates by life stage of SAFE spring Chinook reared at McKenzie Hatchery. Application Schedule Conversion Rearing Period Food Type (#feedings/day) Rate Jan-Mar #0 BioVita Starter 0.48 Feb-Apr #1 BioVita Starter 0.61 Apr-May #2 BioVita Starter 0.76 Jun-Jul 1.2mm BioVita Fry 0.87 Jul-Aug 1.5mm BioVita Fry 0.73 2.0mm BioClarks Fry 0.82 Jul-Nov 2.0mm BioOlympic Fry 2.5mm BioClarks Fry 1.06 Nov-Mar 2.5mm BioOlympic Fry

Lower Columbia Net Pens Food types, application schedules, feeding rates, and average conversion efficiencies of SAFE spring Chinook at the Lower Columbia net pens can be found in Table 9.2.6-5.

Table 9.2.6-5. Food type, application schedule, and conversion rate by rearing period of SAFE spring Chinook reared at the net pens. Application Schedule Conversion Rearing Period Food Type (#feedings/day) Rate Nov-Release 2.5mm BioClarks Fry 1 (3 days/week) 1.2

9.2.7) Fish health monitoring, disease treatment, and sanitation procedures.

In the hatcheries, IHOT fish health guidelines are followed to prevent transmission between lots of fish on site or transmission or amplification to or within the watershed. The juvenile rearing density and loading guidelines used at the facility are based on

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 75

standardized agency guidelines, life-stage specific survival studies conducted at other facilities, staff experience, and other criteria.

Prior to arriving at net pens, fish are vaccinated at Gnat Creek Hatchery to help prevent vibriosis outbreaks. In the net pens, fish health is monitored daily and any mortalities are examined for signs of disease. If an outbreak occurs, the CCF staff biologist will take fish back to the lab for necropsy and gram stains. Usually an ODFW pathologist will receive samples and confirm the diagnosis. Treatment for diseases in the net pens is with medicated fish food produced at Bio-Oregon; usually TM-100 or Romet-30, depending on recommendation from ODFW pathology. Potential diseases in the net pens include vibriosis, furunculosis, and columnaris. If significant losses occur in any of the three species in the net pens, mortalities are bagged, frozen and put in the facility dumpster. No exchange of dip nets, rearing nets, etc. is made between different rearing sites (Youngs Bay, Tongue Point, and Blind Slough) to minimize risk of disease transfer.

9.2.8) Smolt development indices (e.g. gill ATPase activity), if applicable.

The migratory state or smoltification of the release group is determined by size, color, behavior, volitional emigration, and other criteria. ATPase samples have been taken previously to determine smoltification stage. This information was used to determine optimum timing of future releases.

9.2.9) Indicate the use of "natural" rearing methods as applied in the program.

The program utilizes net pens for rearing the majority of the production to achieve confirmed benefits of this rearing strategy. Conditions in the net pens may be more natural than can be found in a typical hatchery setting. Growth rates are rapid since natural feeding including invertebrates and small fishes are available as prey. These fish are exposed to natural salinity profiles and daily tidal exchange.

9.2.10) Indicate risk aversion measures that will be applied to minimize the likelihood for adverse genetic and ecological effects to listed fish under propagation.

Net pens are checked for holes during regular washing schedules to prevent accidental releases. Net pen complexes are sufficiently constructed to avoid accidents due to weather, etc. In the net pens, fish health is monitored daily and any mortalities are examined for signs of disease. If an outbreak occurs, the CCF staff biologist will take fish back to the lab for necropsy and gram stains. Usually an ODFW pathologist will receive samples and confirm diagnosis. Treatment for diseases in the net pens is with medicated fish food produced at Bio-Oregon; usually TM-100 or Romet-30, depending on recommendation from ODFW pathology. Potential diseases in the net pens include vibriosis, furunculosis, and columnaris. If significant losses occur in any of the three species in the net pens, mortalities are bagged, frozen and put in the facility dumpster. No exchange of dip nets, rearing nets, etc. is made between different rearing sites (Youngs Bay, Tongue Point, and Blind Slough) to minimize risk of disease transfer.

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 76

SECTION 10. RELEASE

10.1) Proposed fish release levels.

Table 10.1-1. Proposed release levels and locations for SAFE spring Chinook. Size Release Age Class Maximum Number (fpp) Date Location Eggs na na na na Unfed Fry na na na na Fry na na na na Fingerling na na na na Yearling 650,000 12 3/31 Youngs Bay 300,000 15 4/22 Youngs Bay 150,000 12 3/15 Blind Slough 400,000 12 3/15 Gnat Creek 250,000 14 3/31 Tongue Point 200,000 14 4/20 Tongue Point TOTAL 1,950,000

10.2) Specific location(s) of proposed release(s). Stream, river, or watercourse: (include name and watershed code (e.g. WRIA) number) Release point: (river kilometer location, or latitude/longitude) Major watershed: (e.g. “Skagit River”) Basin or Region: (e.g. “Puget Sound”)

The smolts are released into the Columbia River at Tongue Point, Gnat Creek, and Blind Slough, and into Youngs Bay.

10.3) Actual numbers and sizes of fish released by age class through the program.

Table 10.3-1. Releases of SAFE spring Chinook in the lower Columbia River since 1995. Release Eggs/ Avg size Avg size Avg size Avg size year Unfed Fry (fpp) Fry (fpp) Fingerling (fpp) Yearling (fpp) 1995 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 450,200 9.2 1996 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 892,764 10.8 1997 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 937,072 15.2 1998 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 958,766 11.9 1999 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 850,702 11.0 2000 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 911,060 14.4 2001 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 788,294 15.2 2002 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 868,970 11.9 2003 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 935,729 11.5 2004 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 1,551,822 12.9

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 77

Release Eggs/ Avg size Avg size Avg size Avg size year Unfed Fry (fpp) Fry (fpp) Fingerling (fpp) Yearling (fpp) 2005 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 1,969,026 14.8 2006 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 925,796 13.4 2007 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 794,037 11.0 2008 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 936,108 10.4 2009 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 840,658 14.4 2010 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 1,172,197 11.2 2011 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 1,056,669 12.0 2012 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 1,124,255 12.7 2013 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 1,509,159 11.8 2014 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 1,646,624 12.1 Average 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 1,055,995 12.4

10.4) Actual dates of release and description of release protocols.

Table 10.4-1. Dates of release of SAFE spring Chinook, 1995-2014. Release Release Date Year From To Location 9-Feb 30-Mar Youngs Bay 1995 7-Feb 7-Feb S. Fk. Klaskanine 5-Feb 21-Mar Youngs Bay 31-Jan 31-Jan S. Fk. Klaskanine 1996 5-Feb 29-Feb Tongue Point 29-Feb 29-Feb Blind Slough 1-Feb 4-Apr Youngs Bay 4-Mar 4-Mar S. Fk. Klaskanine 1997 5-Mar 4-Apr Tongue Point 5-Mar 5-Mar Blind Slough 3-Mar 1-Apr Youngs Bay 1998 3-Mar 1-Apr Tongue Point 3-Mar 1-Apr Blind Slough 4-Mar 1-Apr Youngs Bay 1999 3-Mar 1-Apr Tongue Point 3-Mar 1-Apr Blind Slough 1-Mar 4-Apr Youngs Bay 2000 1-Mar 4-Apr Tongue Point 1-Mar 4-Apr Blind Slough 2-Mar 12-Apr Youngs Bay 2001 2-Mar 3-Apr Blind Slough 29-Mar 12-Apr Youngs Bay 2002 28-Mar 30-May Blind Slough 28-Mar 28-Mar Youngs Bay 27-Mar 27-Mar Tongue Point 2003 27-Mar 27-Mar John Day 27-Mar 27-May Blind Slough

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 78

8-Apr 8-Apr Youngs Bay 31-Mar 31-Mar S. Fk. Klaskanine 2004 6-Apr 6-Apr Tongue Point 6-Apr 6-Apr John Day 5-Apr 20-May Blind Slough 22-Mar 5-Apr Youngs Bay 4-Apr 4-Apr Tongue Point 2005 5-Apr 9-Sep S. Fk. Klaskanine 4-Apr 4-Apr John Day 4-Apr 23-May Blind Slough 28-Mar 28/Mar Youngs Bay 27-Mar 27-Mar Tongue Point 2006 27-Mar 27-Mar John Day 27-Mar 24-May Blind Slough 30-Mar 30-Mar Youngs Bay 29-Mar 29-Mar Tongue Point 2007 29-Mar 29-Mar John Day 28-Mar 28-Mar Blind Slough 27-Mar 27-Mar Youngs Bay 2008 25-Mar 25-Mar Tongue Point 25-Mar 25-Mar Blind Slough 23-Mar 23-Mar Youngs Bay 2009 27-Mar 27-Mar Tongue Point 27-Mar 27-Mar Blind Slough 4-Mar 26-Apr Youngs Bay 2010 25-Mar 25-Mar Tongue Point 25-Mar 25-Mar Blind Slough 4-Mar 31-Mar Youngs Bay 2011 30-Mar 30-Mar Tongue Point 29-Mar 29-Mar Blind Slough 8-Mar 29-Mar Youngs Bay 2012 22-Mar 22-Mar Tongue Point 20-Mar 20-Mar Blind Slough 3-Mar 27-Nov Youngs Bay 21-Mar 8-Apr Tongue Point 2013 7-Mar 21-Mar Blind Slough 5-Mar 5-Mar Gnat Creek 14-Mar 14-Mar Youngs Bay 18-Mar 23-Apr Tongue Point 2014 7-Mar 27-Mar Blind Slough 17-Mar 17-Mar Gnat Creek

The time of release of net-pen spring Chinook is based on results of previous experiments. Smolt-to-adult survival rates based on CWT recoveries for different releases have been compared to determine optimum release strategies. The current net- pen strategy is to release in late March – early April, when fish appear to be entering the smolt phase and show signs of wanting to leave (i.e. circling in the pens). Large high tides in late evening are preferred by CCF for releasing smolts, as Ledgerwood et al. (1997) found that fish released near high tide emigrated out of Youngs Bay within one

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 79

tidal cycle. It is also assumed that nighttime releases expose the fish to less predation than daytime releases. Studies using net-pen reared spring Chinook implanted with acoustic tags confirm that smolts released at high tide reach the Columbia River mainstem within one tidal cycle (Robert Warren, Sea Resources, and CREST, personal communication). This shortens the amount of time that smolts are vulnerable to avian predation (i.e. cormorants and terns) in the shallower waters near the net-pen release sites and limits the potential for competition with listed stocks due to co-mingling in the lower estuary.

10.5) Fish transportation procedures, if applicable.

The spring Chinook released into the lower Columbia River are transported from Willamette Basin hatcheries. Transport equipment is described in section 5.2.

10.6) Acclimation procedures (methods applied and length of time).

Net pen acclimation facilities are described in Section 5.6. The majority of releases are acclimated in the net pens over winter. A small portion of the releases are transferred to the net pens for acclimation two weeks prior to release.

10.7) Marks applied, and proportions of the total hatchery population marked, to identify hatchery adults.

All 1,950,000 smolts (100%) release into the lower Columbia will have adipose fin- clipped, and a subcomponent of 190,000 smolts will be fitted with coded-wire tags (~9%) (see flow diagram, Section 1.5).

10.8) Disposition plans for fish identified at the time of release as surplus to programmed or approved levels

All fish transferred to the lower Columbia are released.

10.9) Fish health certification procedures applied pre-release.

All fish are examined for the presence of “reportable pathogens” as defined in the PNFHPC disease control guidelines, within 3 weeks prior to transport or release.

10.10) Emergency release procedures in response to flooding or water system failure.

Net pen complexes are sufficiently constructed to avoid accidents due to weather. Water system failure or flooding incidents are not possible since the pens and fish are immersed in large water bodies rather than supplied by an external source. In the event of net pen failure, fish would be capable of leaving the pens on their own and could not be recovered. Pen complexes are arranged to provide protection to the net pens and minimize the chances of early release.

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 80

However, in the event of a weather-related emergency, procedures for the net pens are as follows: Clatsop County coordinates with the municipal government, the Port Authority and the US Coast Guard for general disaster and event preparedness. As a part of that system, the CCF (SAFE) net pens are identified as “critical water dependent programs”. In the event of any potential hazard or harm, the above agencies all have the list of telephone numbers (home and cell) for CCF staff. Internally, we deploy a minimum of one staff member on duty 365 days a year, and that staff member, who may be alone (usually weekend duty), carries a portable phone for instant communications. Should contact be made the staff are trained to:

 Inform the field supervisor as soon as possible.  Take corrective action on the site as his/her judgment informs.  Contact the Project Manager if the event involves policy issues or inter-governmental relations.

The project has sustained several significant flood events, including the 1996 one- hundred-year flood without loss of fish or infrastructure. Pilings, to which the pens are moored, are of significant height to withstand such occurrences.

10.11) Indicate risk aversion measures that will be applied to minimize the likelihood for adverse genetic and ecological effects to listed fish resulting from fish releases.

Spring Chinook salmon are not native to the lower Columbia. Spring Chinook smolts released by this program have been monitored to check for residualism. Residual hatchery fish have not been observed to date. For discussion on how releases may affect other species, please refer to Section 3.5.

SECTION 11. MONITORING AND EVALUATION OF PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

11.1) Monitoring and evaluation of “Performance Indicators” presented in Section 1.10.

11.1.1) Describe plans and methods proposed to collect data necessary to respond to each “Performance Indicator” identified for the program.

Many policies within the hatchery program are already in place to minimize and avoid risks to ESA-listed species. Thus, much of the monitoring and evaluation of the SAFE spring Chinook program are incorporated into routine ODFW operations within the Hatchery, Fish Pathology, and Fish Management programs. Refer to Section 1.10 for a listing of monitoring and evaluation efforts associated with each of the performance indicators for the SAFE spring Chinook program.

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 81

11.1.2) Indicate whether funding, staffing, and other support logistics are available or committed to allow implementation of the monitoring and evaluation program.

Funding for monitoring and evaluation is provided by BPA and NOAA through one of two projects; the SAFE project in Oregon and Washington (BPA Project # 1993-06000), and the Monitoring Evaluation and Reforms (MER) Coded-Wire Tag recovery project in Oregon (NOAA – Mitchell Act).

11.2) Indicate risk aversion measures that will be applied to minimize the likelihood for adverse genetic and ecological effects to listed fish resulting from monitoring and evaluation activities.

No adverse effects to listed stocks are anticipated from monitoring of the landed catch and analysis of CWT data.

SECTION 12. RESEARCH

No research specific to the SAFE spring Chinook program is currently being conducted or proposed. The SAFE project has conducted or been involved in several studies with a goal of maximizing smolt survival, improving smolt quality, and minimizing impacts on endangered salmonids and their habitat. From 1995-2006, the program spent considerable time investigating various rearing, feeding, and release strategies; the results of which are now incorporated into a preferred rearing and release regime.

12.1) Objective or purpose.

Not applicable.

12.2) Cooperating and funding agencies.

Not applicable.

12.3) Principle investigator or project supervisor and staff.

Not applicable.

12.4) Status of stock, particularly the group affected by project, if different than the stock(s) described in Section 2.

Not applicable.

12.5) Techniques: include capture methods, drugs, samples collected, tags applied.

Not applicable.

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 82

12.6) Dates or time periods in which research activity occurs.

Not applicable.

12.7) Care and maintenance of live fish or eggs, holding duration, transport methods.

Not applicable.

12.8) Expected type and effects of take and potential for injury or mortality.

Not applicable.

12.9) Level of take of listed fish: number of range or fish handled, injured, or killed by sex, age, or size, if not already indicated in Section 2 and the attached “take table”.

Not applicable.

12.10) Alternative methods to achieve project objectives.

Not applicable.

12.11) List species similar or related to the threatened species; provide number and causes of mortality related to this research project.

Not applicable.

12.12) Indicate risk aversion measures that will be applied to minimize the likelihood for adverse ecological effects, injury or mortality to listed fish as a result of the proposed research activities.

Not applicable.

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 83

SECTION 13. ATTACHMENTS AND CITATIONS

Bayer, R.D. 1986. Seabirds near an Oregon estuarine salmon hatchery in 1982 and during the 1983 El Nino. Fishery Bulletin 84: 279-286.

Bisbal, G.A., and W.E. McConnaha. 1998. Consideration of ocean conditions in the management of salmon. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 55: 2178- 2186.

Bottom, D.L., K.K. Jones and M.J. Herring. 1984. Fishes of the Columbia River estuary. Portland, Oregon: Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife; final report, Columbia River Estuary Data Development Program, Columbia River Estuary Study Taskforce, Astoria, OR. 113 pp.

Cederholm, C.J., M.D. Kunze, T. Murota, and A. Sibatani. 1999. Pacific salmon carcasses: Essential contributions of nutrients and energy for aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. Fisheries 24(10): 6-15.

Collis, K., R.E. Beaty, and B.R. Crain. 1995. Changes in catch rate and diet of northern squawfish associated with the release of hatchery-reared juvenile salmonids in a Columbia River reservoir. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 15:346- 357.

Duff C, G. Whisler, E. Ollerenshaw, P. Hulett, S. Meshke, A. Dietrichs, and A. Neys. 2013. Select area fishery enhancement project, FY 2010–12 Annual Report. US Department of Energy, Bonneville Power Administration, Portland, OR. 96 pp.

Federal Register Notice. 1999. Endangered and Threatened Species: Threatened Status for Three Chinook Salmon Evolutionarily Significant Units in Washington and Oregon, and Endangered Status for One Chinook Salmon ESU in Washington. Vol. 64, No 56, pp 14308-14328.

Federal Register Notice. 2004. Endangered and Threatened Species: Proposed Listing Determinations for 27 ESUs of West Coast Salmonids; Proposed Rule. Vol. 69, No 113, pp 33102-33179.

Federal Register Notice. 2014. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife; Final Rule to Revise the Code of Federal Regulations for Species Under the Jurisdiction of the National Marine Fisheries Service Vol. 79, No 71, pp 20802-20817.

Federal Register Notice. 2005. Endangered and Threatened Species: Final Listing Determinations for 16 ESUs of West Coast Salmon, and Final 4(d) Protective Regulations for Threatened Salmonid ESUs. Vol. 70, No 123, pp 37160-37204.

Fulop, J. 2003. Oregon lower Columbia River fall and winter chinook spawning ground surveys, 1952-2002. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Clackamas, Oregon.

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 84

Groot, C. and L. Margolis. 1991. Pacific Salmon Life Histories. University of British Columbia Press, Vancouver, British Columbia.

Healey, M.C. 1991. Life history of Chinook salmon. Pacific Salmon Life Histories. C. Groot and L. Margolis. Vancouver, UBC Press: 313-393.

Hatchery Scientific Review Group (HSRG). 2009. Columbia River hatchery reform system- wide report. Available at: http://www.hatcheryreform.us/hrp/reports/system/welcome_show.action.

Hulett, P., J. Wilson, G. Whisler, G. Gale, S. Meshke, A. Dietrichs, and T. Miethe. 2010. Select Area Fishery Enhancement project. FY 2009 Annual Report, US Department of Energy, Bonneville Power Administration, Portland, Oregon. 51 pp.

Integrated Hatchery Operations Team (IHOT). 1995. Policies and Procedures for Columbia Basin Anadromous Salmonid Hatcheries, Annual Report 1994. Report to Bonneville Power Administration, Portland, OR. 119pp.

Integrated Hatchery Operations Team (IHOT). 1996. Operation Plans for Anadromous Fish Production Facilities in the Columbia River Basin (Volume II), Annual Report 1995. Report to Bonneville Power Administration, Portland, OR.

Integrated Hatchery Operations Team (IHOT). 1997. Hatchery Evaluation Report: Willamette Hatchery – Spring Chinook (Willamette Stock). Montgomery Watson, Bellevue, WA.

Kostow K. 2009. Factors that contribute to the ecological risks of salmon and steelhead hatchery programs and some mitigating strategies. Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries 19: 9–31.

Kostow K. 2012. Strategies for reducing the ecological risks of hatchery programs: case studies from the Pacific Northwest. Environmental Biology of Fishes 94: 285–310.

Ledgerwood, R. D., B.A. Ryan, and R.N. Iwamoto. 1997. Estuarine and nearshore-ocean acoustic tracking of juvenile spring chinook salmon smolts from the Columbia River. Proceedings of the 3rd conference on fish telemetry in Europe, June 20-25, 1999, Centre for Environment, Fisheries, and Aquaculture Science, Lowestoft, UK.

Lichatowich, J.A., and J.D. McIntyre. 1987. Use of hatcheries in the management of Pacific anadromous salmonids. Pages 131–136 in M. J. Dadswell, R. J. Klauda, C. M. Moffitt, R. L. Saunders, R. A. Rulifson, and J. E. Cooper, editors. Common strategies of anadromous and catadromous fishes. American Fisheries Society, Symposium 1, Bethesda, Maryland.

Lower Columbia Fish Recovery Board (LCFRB). 2004. Lower Columbia Salmon and Steelhead Recovery and Subbasin Plan. Lower Columbia Fish Recovery Board,

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 85

Longview, Washington. Available at: http://www.nwcouncil.org/fw/subbasinplanning/lowercolumbia/plan/2004_05/

McCabe, G. T., Jr., W. D. Muir, R. L. Emmett, and J. T. Durkin. 1983. Interrelationships between juvenile salmonids and nonsalmonid fish in the Columbia River estuary. Fishery Bulletin 81(4):815-826.

McElhany, P., M.H. Ruckelshaus, M.J. Ford, T.C. Wainwright, and E.P. Bjorkstedt. 2000. Viable Salmonid Populations and the Recovery of Evolutionarily Significant Units. U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA Technical Memorandum: NMFS-NWFSC-42. NOAA, Seattle, WA.

McElhany, P., T. Backman, C. Busack, S. Heppel, S. Kolmes, A. Maule, J. Myers, D. Rawding, D. Shively, A. Steel, C. Steward, and T. Whitesel. 2003. Interim Report on Viability Criteria for Willamette and Lower Columbia Basin Pacific Salmonids. Willamette/ Lower Columbia Technical Recovery Team. NMFS Northwest Fisheries Science Center. Seattle, WA. Available at: http://www.nwfsc.noaa.gov/trt/wlc_viabrpt/appendix_a.pdf.

McElhany, P., T. Backman, C. Busack, S. Kolmes, J. Myers, D. Rawding, A. Steel, C. Steward, T. Whitesel, and C. Willis. 2004. Status evaluation of salmon and steelhead populations in the Willamette and lower Columbia River basins. Willamette/Lower Columbia Technical Recovery Team. NOAA Fisheries, Northwest Fisheries Science Center, Seattle, WA.

McElhany, P., C. Busack, M. Chilcote, S. Kolmes, B. McIntosh, J. M. Myers, D. Rawding, A. Steel, C. Steward, D. Ward, T. Whitesel, and C. Willis. 2006. Revised viability criteria for salmon and steelhead in the Willamette and Lower Columbia Basins. Draft Report. NOAA Northwest Fisheries Science Center, Seattle, WA.

McElhany, P., M. Chilcote, J. Myers, R. Beamesderfer. 2007. Viability status of Oregon salmon and steelhead populations in the Willamette and lower Columbia basins. National Marine Fisheries Service Northwest Fisheries Science Center, Seattle, Washington.

McNeil, W.J. and D.C. Himsworth. 1980. Salmonid ecosystems of the North Pacific. Oregon State University Press and Oregon State University Sea Grant College Program, Corvallis, Oregon.

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 1991. Status review for lower Columbia River Coho Salmon. National Marine Fisheries Service, Northwest Fisheries Science Center, Seattle, WA.

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 1999a. Biological Opinion On Artificial Propagation in the Columbia River Basin. Incidental Take of Listed Salmon and Steelhead from Federal and Non-Federal Hatchery Programs that Collect, Rear and Release Unlisted Fish Species. March 29, 1999. National Marine Fisheries Service,

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 86

Portland, OR. 175pp.

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 1999b. Report to Congress: Impacts of California sea lions and Pacific harbor seals on salmonids and West Coast ecosystems. National Marine Fisheries Service, Silver Springs, MD.

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 2004. Salmonid hatchery inventory and effects evaluation report: An evaluation of the effects of artificial propagation on the status and likelihood of extinction of West Coast salmon and steelhead under the Federal Endangered Species Act. Technical Memorandum NMFS–NWR/SWR. Available at: http://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/publications/hatchery/shieer.pdf.

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 2008. Willamette Project Biological Opinion. July 11, 2008. Available at: http://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/fish_passage/willamette_opinion/

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 2011. Upper Willamette River Conservation and Recovery Plan for Chinook Salmon and Steelhead. NOAA, Portland, Oregon. Available at: http://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/protected_species/salmon_steelhead/recovery_p lanning_and_implementation/willamette_river/upper_willamette_river_recovery_plan_fo r_chinook_salmon_steelhead.html

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 2013. ESA Recovery Plan for Lower Columbia River Coho Salmon, Lower Columbia River Chinook Salmon, Columbia River Chum Salmon, and Lower Columbia River Steelhead. NOAA, Seattle, WA.

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 2017. Endangered Species Act (ESA) Section 7(a)(2) Biological Opinion and Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) Consultation. NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service’s implementation of the Mitchell Act Final Environmental Impact Statement preferred alternative and administration of Mitchell Act hatchery funding. Available at: http://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/publications/hatchery/mitchell- act/mitchell-act_opinion_011517.pdf

North, J., M. Miller, J. Sewall, T. Jones, A. Dietrichs, and T. Miethe. 2006. Select area fishery evaluation project: final report 1993–2005. Final project completion report. US Department of Energy, Bonneville Power Administration, Portland, Oregon. 255 pp.

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW). 1992. Clackamas River Subbasin Fish Management Plan, Portland, OR.

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW). 1999. Disposition of Excess Hatchery Fish, Draft 4, 1999. Portland, Oregon.

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW). 2003a. Fish Health Management Policy.

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 87

September 2003. Salem, OR. Available at: http://www.dfw.state.or.us/fish/hatchery/docs/fish_mgmt_policy.pdf

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW). 2003b. Native Fish Conservation Policy. September 2003. Salem, OR.

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW). 2005a. Fisheries Management and Evaluation Plan - Lower Columbia River Chinook in Oregon Freshwater Fisheries of the Lower Columbia River Tributaries (Between the Pacific Ocean and Hood River). Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Salem, Oregon.

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW). 2010. Fish Hatchery Management Policy. December 2010. Salem, OR. Available at: http://www.dfw.state.or.us/fish/hatchery/docs/hatchery_mgmt.pdf

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW). 2012. Management Strategies for Columbia River Recreational and Commercial Fisheries: 2013 and Beyond. Available at: http://www.dfw.state.or.us/agency/commission/minutes/12/12_dec/Exhibit%20H_Att%2 03_Col%20R%20Fisheries%20Mgmt-%202013%20%20Beyond.pdf.

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 2010. Lower Columbia River Conservation and Recovery Plan for Oregon Populations of Salmon and Steelhead. http://www.dfw.state.or.us/fish/CRP/docs/lower- columbia/OR_LRC_Plan%20-%20Aug_6_2010_Final.pdf

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife and Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW and WDFW). 2015. 2015 Joint Staff Report: Stock Status and Fisheries for Spring Chinook, Summer Chinook, Sockeye, Steelhead, and Other Species, and Miscellaneous Regulations. January 2015. Available at: http://www.dfw.state.or.us/fish/OSCRP/CRM/joint_staff_reports_archive.asp

Petersen, J.H. and D.L. De Angelis. 1992. Functional response and capture timing in an individual-based model: predation by northern squawfish (Ptychocheilus oregonensis) on juvenile salmonids in the Columbia River. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science 49:2551-2565.

Reimers, P.E. 1973. The length of residence of juvenile fall chinook salmon in Sixes River, Oregon. Research Reports of the Fish Commission of Oregon 4(2):1-42.

RMIS (Regional Mark Information System). 2016. Retrieved 2016. Available at: http://www.rmpc.org/.

Roby, D.D., D.P. Craig, K. Collis, and S.L. Adamany. 1998. Avian Predation on Juvenile Salmonids in the Lower Columbia River 1997 Annual Report. Bonneville Power Administration Contract 97BI33475 and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Contract E96970049. 70 pp.

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 88

Technical Advisory Committee (TAC). 2008. Biological Assessment of Incidental Impacts on Salmon Species Listed Under the Endangered Species Act in the 2008-2017 Non-Indian and Treaty Indian Fisheries in the Columbia River Basin.

U.S. v. Oregon. 2008. 2008–2017 United States v. Oregon management agreement. Available: http://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/fisheries/salmon_steelhead/united_states_v_ore gon.html. April 2008.

Wahle, R.J. and R.R. Vreeland. 1977. Bioeconomic contribution of Columbia River hatchery fall chinook salmon, 1961 through 1964 broods, to the Pacific salmon fisheries. Fisheries Bulletin 76:179-208.

Waldeck, R.D., M. Sytsma, J. Cordell, and J. Chapman. 2003. Preliminary results from the lower Columbia River aquatic nonindigenous species survey (LCRANS) 2001-2003. Portland State University, 30 pp.

Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, and Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW and ODFW). 2002. Status Report: Columbia River Fish Runs and Fisheries, 1938-2000. July 2002.

Watts, J.W. 2003. The 2002 lower Columbia River and Buoy 10 recreational fisheries. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Clackamas, Oregon.

Wevers, M.J., J. Wetherbee and W. Hunt. 1992. Santiam and Calapooia Sub-basin Fish Management Plan. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Salem.

Whisler G., G. Gale, P. Hulett, J. Wilson, S. Meshke, A. Dietrichs, T. Miethe. 2009. Select area fishery enhancement project, FY 2007–08 Annual Report. US Department of Energy, Bonneville Power Administration, Portland, Oregon. 103 pp.

Williams, J., G. Matthews, J. Meyers, S. G. Smith, T. Cooney, and C. Toole. 1998. Hatchery extra mortality hypothesis. Submission 1 to D.R. Marmorek and 28 co-authors. 21 August 1998. Plan for Analyzing and Testing Hypotheses (PATH): Weight of Evidence Report. Compiled and edited by ESSA Technologies, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.

Ziller, J., S. Mamoyac, S. Knapp. 2002. Analyses of releasing marked and unmarked spring Chinook salmon above U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Flood Control Projects in the Willamette Valley. Draft. ODFW, South Willamette Watershed District.

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 89

SECTION 14. CERTIFICATION LANGUAGE AND SIGNATURE OF RESPONSIBLE PARTY

“I hereby certify that the information provided is complete, true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I understand that the information provided in this HGMP is submitted for the purpose of receiving limits from take prohibitions specified under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C.1531-1543) and regulations promulgated thereafter for the proposed hatchery program, and that any false statement may subject me to the criminal penalties of 18 U.S.C. 1001, or penalties provided under the Endangered Species Act of 1973.”

Name and Title of Applicant: John North, Ocean Salmon and Columbia River Program Manager

Signature: ______Date: ______

Certified by: Scott Patterson, Fish Propagation Program Manager

Signature: ______Date: ______

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 90

ATTACHMENT 1. DEFINITION OF TERMS REFERENCED IN THE HGMP TEMPLATE.

Augmentation - The use of artificial production to increase harvestable numbers of fish in areas where the natural freshwater production capacity is limited, but the capacity of other salmonid habitat areas will support increased production. Also referred to as “fishery enhancement”.

Critical population threshold - An abundance level for an independent Pacific salmonid population below which: depensatory processes are likely to reduce it below replacement; short-term effects of inbreeding depression or loss of rare alleles cannot be avoided; and productivity variation due to demographic stochasticity becomes a substantial source of risk. Direct take - The intentional take of a listed species. Direct takes may be authorized under the ESA for the purpose of propagation to enhance the species or research.

Evolutionarily Significant Unit (ESU) - NMFS definition of a distinct population segment (the smallest biological unit that will be considered to be a species under the Endangered Species Act). A population will be/is considered to be an ESU if 1) it is substantially reproductively isolated from other conspecific population units, and 2) it represents an important component in the evolutionary legacy of the species.

Harvest project - Projects designed for the production of fish that are primarily intended to be caught in fisheries.

Hatchery fish - A fish that has spent some part of its life-cycle in an artificial environment and whose parents were spawned in an artificial environment.

Hatchery population - A population that depends on spawning, incubation, hatching or rearing in a hatchery or other artificial propagation facility.

Hazard - Hazards are undesirable events that a hatchery program is attempting to avoid.

Incidental take - The unintentional take of a listed species as a result of the conduct of an otherwise lawful activity.

Integrated harvest program - Project in which artificially propagated fish produced primarily for harvest are intended to spawn in the wild and are fully reproductively integrated with a particular natural population.

Integrated recovery program - An artificial propagation project primarily designed to aid in the recovery, conservation, or reintroduction of particular natural population(s), and fish produced are intended to spawn in the wild or be genetically integrated with the targeted natural population(s). Sometimes referred to as “supplementation”.

Isolated harvest program - Project in which artificially propagated fish produced primarily for harvest are not intended to spawn in the wild or be genetically integrated with any specific natural population.

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 91

Isolated recovery program - An artificial propagation project primarily designed to aid in the recovery, conservation or reintroduction of particular natural population(s), but the fish produced are not intended to spawn in the wild or be genetically integrated with any specific natural population.

Mitigation - The use of artificial propagation to produce fish to replace or compensate for loss of fish or fish production capacity resulting from the permanent blockage or alteration of habitat by human activities.

Natural fish - A fish that has spent essentially all of its life-cycle in the wild and whose parents spawned in the wild. Synonymous with natural origin recruit (NOR).

Natural origin recruit (NOR) - See natural fish.

Natural population - A population that is sustained by natural spawning and rearing in the natural habitat.

Population - A group of historically interbreeding salmonids of the same species of hatchery, natural, or unknown parentage that have developed a unique gene pool, that breed in approximately the same place and time, and whose progeny tend to return and breed in approximately the same place and time. They often, but not always, can be separated from another population by genotypic or demographic characteristics. This term is synonymous with stock.

Preservation (Conservation) - The use of artificial propagation to conserve genetic resources of a fish population at extremely low population abundance, and potential for extinction, using methods such as captive propagation and cryopreservation.

Research - The study of critical uncertainties regarding the application and effectiveness of artificial propagation for augmentation, mitigation, conservation, and restoration purposes, and identification of how to effectively use artificial propagation to address those purposes.

Restoration - The use of artificial propagation to hasten rebuilding or reintroduction of a fish population to harvestable levels in areas where there is low, or no natural production, but potential for increase or reintroduction exists because sufficient habitat for sustainable natural production exists or is being restored.

Stock - (see “Population”).

Take - To harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct.

Viable population threshold - An abundance level above which an independent Pacific salmonid population has a negligible risk of extinction due to threats from demographic variation (random or directional), local environmental variation, and genetic diversity changes (random or directional) over a 100-year time frame.

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 92

ATTACHMENT 2. AGE CLASS DESIGNATIONS BY FISH SIZE AND SPECIES FOR SALMONIDS RELEASED FROM HATCHERY FACILITIES. (generally from Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, November, 1999).

SIZE CRITERIA SPECIES/AGE CLASS Number of fish/pound Grams/fish

Chinook Yearling <=20 >=23 Chinook (Zero) Fingerling >20 to 150 3 to <23 Chinook Fry >150 to 900 0.5 to <3 Chinook Unfed Fry >900 <0.5

Coho Yearling 1/ <20 >=23 Coho Fingerling >20 to 200 2.3 to <23 Coho Fry >200 to 900 0.5 to <2.3 Coho Unfed Fry >900 <0.5

Chum Fed Fry <=1000 >=0.45 Chum Unfed Fry >1000 <0.45

Sockeye Yearling 2/ <=20 >=23 Sockeye Fingerling >20 to 800 0.6 to <23 Sockeye Fall Releases <150 >2.9 Sockeye Fry > 800 to 1500 0.3 to <0.6 Sockeye Unfed Fry >1500 <0.3

Pink Fed Fry <=1000 >=0.45 Pink Unfed Fry >1000 <0.45

Steelhead Smolt <=10 >=45 Steelhead Yearling <=20 >=23 Steelhead Fingerling >20 to 150 3 to <23 Steelhead Fry >150 <3

Cutthroat Trout Yearling <=20 >=23

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 93

Cutthroat Trout Fingerling >20 to 150 3 to <23 Cutthroat Trout Fry >150 <3

Trout Legals <=10 >=45 Trout Fry >10 <45

1/ Coho yearlings defined as meeting size criteria and 1 year old at release, and released prior to June 1st. 2/ Sockeye yearlings defined as meeting size criteria and 1 year old.

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 94

ATTACHMENT 3 – PROGRAMS, STOCKS, FACILITIES, OPERATORS, AND FUNDERS ASSOCIATED WITH THE SAFE PROJECT

Notes to Aid in Interpretation of Tables

 BPA has attempted to capture the multiple entities associated with funding and operating the entirety of the SAFE Project in order to provide NMFS with the information it needs to identify action agencies and programs, and analyze effects, in the forthcoming SAFE Project BiOp. These tables are only best efforts at this point in time, because BPA does not have all of the information; the SAFE Project has evolved considerably since the 1998 SAFE BiOp, and the different program HGMPs, statements of work, Mitchell Act BA/BiOp, and comments from different agencies sometimes conflict and are difficult to reconcile. As for BPA’s current role in the SAFE Project, BPA partially funds three programs under its Northwest Power Act authority – the ODFW/CCF SAFE spring Chinook salmon and coho salmon programs, and the WDFW SAFE Deep River coho salmon program.

 To BPA’s knowledge, Oregon’s Select Area Bright (SAB) Fall Chinook Salmon Program is now entirely state-funded and operated only at facilities owned by the State of Oregon. At ODFW’s request to shift funding from fall Chinook to coho, BPA discontinued funding SABs on December 31, 2016.

 NMFS indicated that the WDFW SAFE Deep River Tule Fall Chinook Salmon Program has also been discontinued.

 NMFS also commented that the WDFW SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon Program is fully funded by the Mitchell Act (and is therefore covered entirely in the Mitchell Act BiOp), and should not be a part of the proposed action for the reinitiation of consultation on the SAFE Project.

 The USACE indicated that it funds operation and maintenance of the Minto adult fish facility and Marion Forks Hatchery (located on the North Santiam River and utilized for the ODFW/CCF SAFE chinook salmon program), Bonneville Hatchery (located on the mainstem Columbia and utilized for the ODFW/CCF SAFE coho salmon program), and Foster adult fish facility (located on the South Santiam River and utilized for the ODFW/CCF SAFE chinook salmon program) for the purpose of producing mitigation fish. USACE indicated that it does not provide any funding for the production of fish associated with the SAFE Project.

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 95

ODFW/CCF SAFE Coho Salmon Program

Stock Broodstock Collection Early Rearing Facilities, Operators (O), Late Rearing/Acclimation and Release Research, Monitoring, and Facilities, Operators (O), and Funders (F) Facilities, Operators (O), and Funders (F) Evaluation Operators (O) and and Funders (F) Funders (F) Cascade Hatchery NF Klaskanine Hatchery  O: ODFW  O: ODFW  F: NMFS  F: BPA/ODFW1 Cedar Creek Hatchery SF Klaskanine Hatchery  O: ODFW  O: CCF  F: State of Oregon  F: BPA/ODFW/Fisherman’s Assessment2 Clackamas Hatchery Blind Slough Net Pens  O: ODFW  O: CCF BPA funds ODFW to conduct a portion of RM&E for this program,  F: NMFS/PGE/COP  F: BPA/ODFWError! Bookmark not defined. Big Creek (stock 13) Big Creek Hatchery Tongue Point Net Pens including adipose fin clips and  O: ODFW NF Klaskanine Hatchery coded wire tags. RM&E for this  O: ODFW  O: CCF program is funded by other,  F: Oregon/NMFS Error! Bookmark not defined.  F: BPA/ODFW1  F: BPA/ODFW additional sources. SF Klaskanine Hatchery Youngs Bay Net Pens  O: CCF  O: CCF  F: BPA/ODFW/Fisherman’s Assessment2  F: BPA/ODFWError! Bookmark not defined. Oxbow Hatchery  O: ODFW  F: NMFS/ODFW Upper and Lower Herman Creek Ponds3  O: ODFW  F: NMFS/ODFW Bonneville Hatchery NF Klaskanine Hatchery  O: ODFW  O: ODFW  F: NMFS/USACE  F: BPA/ODFW1 Cascade Hatchery SF Klaskanine Hatchery  O: ODFW  O: CCF 4 4 Bonneville (stock 14) Bonneville Hatchery  F: NMFS  F: BPA/ODFW2 BPA funds ODFW to conduct a  O: ODFW Clackamas Hatchery Blind Slough Net Pens portion of RM&E for this program,  F: NMFS  O: ODFW  O: CCF including adipose fin clips and  F: NMFS/PGE/COP  F: BPA/ODFW2 coded wire tags. RM&E for this SF Klaskanine Hatchery Tongue Point Net Pens program is funded by other, additional sources.

1 BPA is uncertain whether NMFS partially funds SAFE coho activities at North Fork Klaskanine Hatchery due to conflicting documents and comments, and leaves this for NMFS to ascertain in the consultation. NMFS indicated that the North Fork Klaskanine Hatchery may become a primary broodstock collection station for SAFE coho after run-year 2019. 2 BPA is uncertain whether NMFS partially funds SAFE coho activities at South Fork Klaskanine Hatchery, and Blind Slough, Tongue Point, and Youngs Bay Net Pens due to conflicting documents and comments, and leaves this for NMFS to ascertain in the consultation. 3 BPA is uncertain whether the Upper and Lower Herman Creek Ponds facility is operated and funded for SAFE coho purposes due to conflicting comments, and leaves this for NMFS to ascertain in the consultation. 4 NMFS and ODFW commented that ODFW will no longer be collecting broodstock for the ODFW/CCF SAFE coho program at Bonneville Hatchery after run-year 2019.

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 96

Stock Broodstock Collection Early Rearing Facilities, Operators (O), Late Rearing/Acclimation and Release Research, Monitoring, and Facilities, Operators (O), and Funders (F) Facilities, Operators (O), and Funders (F) Evaluation Operators (O) and and Funders (F) Funders (F)  O: CCF  O: CCF  F: BPA/ODFW/Fisherman’s Assessment2  F: BPA/ODFW2 Bonneville (stock 14) Oxbow Hatchery Youngs Bay Net Pens (continued)  O: ODFW  O: CCF  F: NMFS/ODFW  F: BPA/ODFW2 Upper and Lower Herman Creek Ponds3  O: ODFW  F: NMFS/ODFW Sandy River (stock 11) Sandy Hatchery Sandy Hatchery Blind Slough Net Pens BPA funds ODFW to conduct a  O: ODFW  O: ODFW  O: CCF portion of RM&E for this program,  F: Oregon/NMFS  F: Oregon/NMFS  F: BPA/ODFW2 including adipose fin clips and Eagle Creek (back-up)5 Salmon River (back-up) coded wire tags. RM&E for this  O: ODFW  O: ODFW program is funded by other,  F: USFWS/NMFS  F: State of Oregon additional sources.

5 NMFS indicated that Eagle Creek Hatchery will likely no longer be used as a back-up collection facility after run-year 2019. SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 97

ODFW/CCF SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon Program

Stock Broodstock Collection Early Rearing Facilities, Operators (O), Late Rearing/Acclimation and Release Research, Monitoring, and Facilities, Operators (O), and and Funders (F) Facilities, Operators (O), and Funders (F) Evaluation Operators (O) and Funders (F) Funders (F) Big Creek Hatchery Blind Slough Net Pens  O: ODFW  O: CCF  F: Oregon/NMFS  F: ODFW/BPA4 Bonneville Hatchery Tongue Point Net Pens  O: ODFW  O: CCF  F: NMFS  F: ODFW/BPA4 Cascade Hatchery Youngs Bay Net Pens  O: ODFW  O: CCF BPA funds ODFW to conduct a  F: NMFS  F:ODFW/BPA4 portion of RM&E for the SAFE Clackamas Hatchery3 program, including adipose fin clips Clackamas (stock 19)1 Clackamas Hatchery and coded wire tags. RM&E for this  O: ODFW  O: ODFW program at large is funded by other,  F: NMFS/PGE/COP 2 additional sources.  F: NMFS/PGE/COP Gnat Creek Hatchery

 O: ODFW  F: ODFW/BPA Oxbow Hatchery  O: ODFW  F: NMFS/ODFW Marion Forks Hatchery (NF Santiam)  O: ODFW  F: ODFW Marion Forks Hatchery (NF Santiam) Blind Slough Net Pens  O: ODFW  O: CCF  F: ODFW  F: ODFW/BPA4 BPA funds ODFW to conduct a Minto Fish Facility (NF Santiam) Tongue Point Net Pens portion of RM&E for the SAFE North Santiam (stock 21)  O: ODFW  O: CCF program, including adipose fin clips  F: ODFW  F: ODFW/BPA4 and coded wire tags. RM&E for this Youngs Bay Net Pens program at large is funded by other,  O: CCF additional sources.  F:ODFW/BPA4

1 ODFW has indicated during informal consultation that the Clackamas stock will be the primary source of broodstock for the SAFE spring Chinook program, and has additionally indicated (as confirmed by the HGMP) that the McKenzie stock will not be utilized in the SAFE spring Chinook program. BPA considers these representations regarding broodstock sources to be part of the proposed action. 2 NMFS commented that the ODFW/CCF SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon Program HGMP states that the funding for SAFE spring Chinook at Clackamas Hatchery makes up only 1% of the total Clackamas Hatchery budget. ODFW has indicated during informal consultation that the Clackamas stock will be the primary source of broodstock for the SAFE spring Chinook program; BPA considers that representation to be part of the proposed action. 3 BPA is uncertain whether Clackamas Hatchery is utilized as an early rearing facility for SAFE spring Chinook program purposes, due to conflicting comments, and leaves this for NMFS to ascertain in the consultation. 4 BPA is uncertain whether NMFS partially funds SAFE coho activities at Blind Slough, Tongue Point, and Youngs Bay Net Pens due to conflicting documents and comments, and leaves this for NMFS to ascertain in the consultation. SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 98

Foster Fish Facility (SF Santiam) Big Creek Hatchery Blind Slough Net Pens  O: ODFW  O: ODFW  O: CCF South Santiam (stock 24)  F: ODFW  F: Oregon/NMFS  F: ODFW/BPA4 Bonneville Hatchery Tongue Point Net Pens  O: ODFW  O: CCF  F: ODFW/BPA4  F: NMFS Youngs Bay Net Pens Gnat Creek Hatchery  O: CCF  O: ODFW  F: ODFW/BPA4  F: ODFW/BPA

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 2017 99

WDFW SAFE Deep River Coho Salmon Program

Stock Broodstock Early Rearing Facilities, Late Rearing/Acclimation Research, Collection Operators (O), and and Release Facilities, Monitoring, and Facilities, Funders (F) Operators (O), and Funders Evaluation Operators Operators (O), and (F) (O) and Funders (F) Funders (F) Gray’s River Elochoman Hatchery Deep River Net Pens Hatchery  O: WDFW  O: WDFW BPA funds WDFW to  O: WDFW  F: WDFW/NMFS  F: NMFS/BPA conduct a portion of  F: NMFS/BPA Gray’s River Hatchery RM&E for this Gray’s River North Toutle  O: WDFW program, including N-Type Hatchery  F: NMFS/BPA coded wire tags, 1 Coho  O: WDFW North Toutle Hatchery homing and straying  F: NMFS  O: WDFW analysis, and  F: NMFS/BPA development and Washougal Hatchery implementation of  O: WDFW habitat assessment  F: NMFS protocols at net pens. RM&E for this program is funded by other, additional sources.

1 WDFW discontinued the S-Type SAFE Coho Salmon Program in 2016.

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 100

ADDENDUM A. PROGRAM EFFECTS ON OTHER (AQUATIC OR TERRESTRIAL) ESA-LISTED POPULATIONS. (ANADROMOUS SALMONID EFFECTS ARE ADDRESSED IN SECTION 2)

15.1) List all ESA permits or authorizations for USFWS ESA-listed, proposed, and candidate salmonid and non-salmonid species associated with the hatchery program.

None. The HGMP for this program was submitted to NMFS on 09/28/2005 for ESA take permit or authorization.

15.2) Describe USFWS ESA-listed, proposed, and candidate salmonid and non-salmonid species and habitat that may be affected by hatchery program.

There are three non-anadromous and/or non-salmonid species of fish in the LCR that are federally listed under the ESA (Table 15.2-1). Other ESA listed species are listed in table 15.2-2.

Table 15.2-1) Federal USFWS-listed, non-anadromous and/or non-salmonid fish species that could be incidentally affected by the hatchery program. Range in Lower Type of Interaction with Species Population Status Columbia River Basin Salmon and Steelhead Bull Trout (Salvelinus Columbia Lower Columbia River Predator of juvenile salmon Threatened confluentus) River Mainstem and steelhead Eulachon (Thaleichthys Southern Columbia River and Freshwater prey of salmon Threatened pacificus) DPS tributaries and steelhead Green Sturgeon (Acipenser Southern Threatened Columbia River Estuary Bycatch in salmon fisheries medirostris) DPS

Table 15.2-2) Other listed or candidate species in the area of the hatchery program. Group Name Population Status Marine Killer whale (Orcinus orca) Southern Resident Endangered Mammals Columbian white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus Mammals Columbia River DPS Endangered leucurus) North Oregon Coast Mammals red tree vole (Arborimus longicaudus) Candidate DPS Short-tailed albatross (Phoebastria (=Diomedea) Birds Entire Endangered albatrus) Birds Yellow-billed Cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus) Western U.S. DPS Threatened Western snowy plover (Charadrius alexandrinus Birds Pacific coastal pop. Threatened nivosus) Birds Northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina) Entire Threatened Birds Marbled murrelet (Brachyramphus marmoratus) CA, OR, WA Threatened Birds Streaked Horned lark (Eremophila alpestris strigata) Threatened Insects Oregon silverspot butterfly (Speyeria zerene hippolyta) Entire Threatened Flowering Nelson's checker-mallow (Sidalcea nelsoniana) Threatened Plants

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 101

15.3) Analyze effects.

Direct take of Bull Trout, Eulachon, and Green Sturgeon will not occur as a result of this hatchery program. There could be indirect effects on these fish species as listed in table 15.2-2 but any effect would be negligible and unmeasurable.

No take of USFWS species (Table 15.2-2) will occur nor will they be adversely affected by operation of SAFE program hatcheries.

15.4) Actions taken to minimize potential effects.

No take of USFWS species will occur or be adversely affected by operation of SAFE program hatcheries.

SAFE Spring Chinook Salmon HGMP 102