Monitoring Adult Chinook Salmon, Rainbow Trout, and Steelhead in Battle Creek, California, from March through November 2019 USFWS Report Prepared by: Charles E. Stanley R. J. Bottaro Laurie A. Earley

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office 10950 Tyler Road Red Bluff, CA 96080 December 2020 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

Disclaimer

The mention of trade names or commercial products in this report does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use by the federal government.

The proper citation for this report is:

Stanley, C. E., R. J. Bottaro, and L. A. Earley. 2020. Monitoring adult Chinook Salmon, Rainbow Trout, and Steelhead in Battle Creek, California, from March through November 2019. USFWS Report. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office, Red Bluff, California.

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report ii U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

Monitoring Adult Chinook Salmon, Rainbow Trout, and Steelhead in Battle Creek, California, from March through November 2019 Charles Stanley, R.J. Bottaro, and Laurie A. Earley U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office 10950 Tyler Road, Red Bluff, CA 96080, (530)527-3043 Abstract — This monitoring project provides fisheries information for the adaptive management of anadromous salmonid restoration projects in Battle Creek. Our adult salmonid monitoring investigations included salmonid escapement estimates at the Coleman National Fish Hatchery (CNFH) barrier weir fish ladder and stream surveys documenting salmonid spawning distributions upstream of the barrier weir. Fish passed through the fish ladder and entered ponds outside of the CNFH spawning facilities March 4–July 18 where they were enumerated and processed by hand. Video surveillance occurred concurrently with the spawning building to monitor Pacific Lamprey Entosphenus tridentatus passage as they can pass through the screened auxiliary ladder upstream into Battle Creek whereas other large-bodied fish cannot. After July18, video surveillance was used as the primary monitoring method to observe all fish passing upstream of the CNFH barrier weir until August 1 for salmonids and until September 31 for Pacific Lamprey. Prior to opening the barrier weir fish ladder on March 1, CNFH personnel released 128 unclipped (adipose fin present) Rainbow Trout/steelhead Oncorhynchus mykiss and 66 unclipped Chinook Salmon O. tshawytscha above the barrier weir. The 66 Chinook Salmon were likely late-fall run Chinook Salmon due to the presence of secondary sexual characteristics, spawning coloration, and migration timing. Seventy-four grilse-sized, adipose and left pelvic fin clipped males were collected and processed at Coleman National Fish Hatchery before being routed to Livingston Stone National Fish Hatchery for inclusion in their winter-run Chinook Salmon broodstock. These fish were released into Battle Creek as pre-smolts in 2018 as part of the Battle Creek Jumpstart Program with the intent of reintroducing these fish ahead of completion of components of Battle Creek Restoration Plan goals. Forty-five unclipped and 22 clipped (adipose fin absent) Chinook Salmon were estimated to have passed through the CNFH barrier weir fish ladder (river mile [RM] 6.0) to the middle portion of Battle Creek from March 1 to August 1; all of the clipped fish were grilse-sized, winter-run Chinook Salmon males excepting one, which was a clipped spring-run mistakenly passed upstream during spawning building operations. Additionally, 93 unclipped and one clipped Rainbow Trout/steelhead passed upstream through the fish ladder. Unclipped and clipped fish passage totals were used to estimate the “maximum potential spring-run Chinook” escapement of 46. For two brief periods we redirected fish passage through the river ladder during our spawning building operations to allow native fishes passage upstream otherwise impeded by our operations. These “Foothill Liberation” periods were evaluated as successful in allowing large groups of native fish to pass upstream while few hatchery-origin fishes passed within their short duration. Based on our stream survey redd counts (n = 30) we estimated a spawning population of 60 spring-run Chinook Salmon, which is 130% of the escapement detected during our monitoring period that had no periods of outage requiring interpolation. This exceedance could potentially be attributed to incorrectly identifying non-redd disturbances in the substrate as redds by survey personnel, females creating multiple redd sites, or other unknown reasons. Overall, water temperatures in 2019 were categorized as acceptable during the holding period prior to spawning; however, there was a brief period (< 2d) during which mean daily water temperatures exceeded acceptable ranges for egg incubation within certain redds.

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report iii U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

Table of Contents

Abstract ...... iii Table of Contents ...... iv List of Tables ...... vi List of Figures ...... viii List of Appendices ...... ix Introduction ...... 1 Study Area ...... 3 Methods ...... 4 Coleman National Fish Hatchery barrier weir ...... 4 Spawning building ...... 5 Video passage enumeration ...... 5 Migration timing ...... 7 Size, sex, and age composition ...... 7 Stream surveys ...... 7 Holding temperatures, spawning location and timing ...... 9 Tissue collection for genetic analyses ...... 9 Spring Chinook population trend analysis ...... 9 Results ...... 10 Coleman National Fish Hatchery barrier weir ...... 10 Spawning building operations ...... 10 Video passage enumeration ...... 11 Escapement totals ...... 12 Migration timing ...... 12 Size, sex, and age composition ...... 12 Stream surveys ...... 13 Holding temperatures ...... 14 Spring Chinook population trend analysis ...... 14 Discussion ...... 15 Battle Creek adult monitoring ...... 15 Jumpstart winter Chinook ...... 16 Foothill Species Assemblage Liberations ...... 16 Reduced spring Chinook and redd counts ...... 16

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report iv U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

Hatchery Influence ...... 17 Acknowledgements ...... 18 References ...... 19 Tables ...... 21 Figures ...... 34 Appendix A. Coded Wire Tag Recovery Efforts ...... 49

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report v U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

List of Tables

Table 1. Multiannual summary of total adult late-fall run Chinook Salmon and Rainbow Trout/steelhead released upstream of Coleman National Fish Hatchery (CNFH) barrier weir during the CNFH broodstock collection and spawning program, 1994–2019...... 22 Table 2. Multiannual summary of estimated escapement in Battle Creek of clipped and unclipped Chinook Salmon and Rainbow Trout/steelhead passing upstream through the Coleman National Fish Hatchery (CNFH) barrier weir fish ladder between March and August, 1995–2019...... 23 Table 3. Multiannual summary of total estimated escapement in Battle Creek of all four runs of Chinook Salmon, and Rainbow Trout/steelhead passing upstream of Coleman National Fish Hatchery (CNFH) barrier weir, 1995–2019...... 24 Table 4. Multiannual summary of total Chinook Salmon redds (n) observed between August and November, and their distribution among the North Fork, South Fork, and main stem Battle Creeks, 1995–2019...... 25 Table 5. Multiannual summary from 1995–2019 of Chinook Salmon redd density (redds per mile) in Battle Creek observed during snorkel surveys...... 26 Table 6. Multiannual summary of total days spent processing/enumerating fish at the barrier weir trap, in Coleman National Fish Hatchery’s spawning building, and video monitoring from 1998– 2019...... 27 Table 7. Chinook Salmon captured or video-recorded passing the Coleman National Fish Hatchery barrier weir and associated passage estimates for 2019, including data extrapolated during hours not video recorded or during periods of poor quality recordings...... 28 Table 8. Rainbow trout/steelhead captured or video-recorded passing the Coleman National Fish Hatchery barrier weir and associated passage estimates for 2019, including data extrapolated during hours not video recorded or during periods of poor quality recordings...... 29 Table 9. Temperature criteria used to evaluate the suitability of Battle Creek water temperatures for spring-run Chinook Salmon...... 30 Table 10. Number of redds by reach and estimated range for percent of days that incubating spring Chinook Salmon eggs fell within each water temperature suitability categories in Battle Creek in 2019...... 30 Table 11. Chinook Salmon number of live adults, redds, and carcasses observed during the 2019 Battle Creek stream surveys, by reach...... 31 Table 12. Total biweekly counts of live Chinook Salmon adults observed on 2019 Battle Creek stream surveys, by reach...... 31 Table 13. Number of days mean daily temperatures met Ward and Kier's (1999) suitability categories for spring-run Chinook Salmon holding from June 1 through September 30, 2019 at select monitoring sites in Battle Creek...... 32

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report vi U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

Table 14. Number of days mean daily temperatures met Ward and Kier's (1999) suitability categories for spring-run Chinook Salmon egg incubation from September 15 through October 31, 2019 at select monitoring sites in Battle Creek...... 33

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report vii U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

List of Figures

Figure 1. Map of the Sacramento River and its tributaries (including Battle Creek) between Keswick Dam and Red Bluff, California...... 35 Figure 2. Map of Battle Creek depicting the location in river miles (RM) of the Coleman National Fish Hatchery barrier weir, stream survey reaches, the old Wildcat Dam site, and the historical limits to anadromy...... 36

Figure 3. Aerial photograph of the fish ladder at Coleman National Fish Hatchery...... 37 Figure 4. Diel migration of Chinook Salmon (CHN, unclipped and clipped) observed at the Coleman National Fish Hatchery barrier weir during period of video monitoring (July 16–August 1) in 2019...... 38 Figure 5. Diel migration of Rainbow Trout/steelhead (RBT, unclipped and clipped) observed at the Coleman National Fish Hatchery barrier weir during period of video monitoring (July 16– August 1) in 2019...... 39 Figure 6. Number of clipped and unclipped Chinook Salmon observed at the Coleman National Fish Hatchery barrier weir fish ladder (in spawning facility and by video) in 2019, by week. .... 40 Figure 7. Number of clipped and unclipped Rainbow Trout/steelhead observed at the Coleman National Fish Hatchery fish ladder (in spawning building and by video) in 2019, by week...... 41 Figure 8. Length-frequency distribution of Chinook Salmon classified by run (WCS=winter-run Chinook Salmon, LFCS=late-fall run Chinook Salmon, SCS=spring-run Chinook Salmon) captured in Coleman National Fish Hatchery spawning facility in 2019. Length data for two fall- run Chinook Salmon (FL = 72.5, 73.0 cm) are intentionally omitted from figure to improve readability...... 42 Figure 9. Length–frequency distribution of Rainbow Trout/steelhead captured in Coleman National Fish Hatchery spawning building in 2019...... 43 Figure 10. North Fork (NF) Battle Creek mean daily water temperature and flow for 2019 and average temperature from 2002–2018 at the North Fork Confluence...... 44 Figure 11. South Fork (SF) Battle Creek mean daily water temperature and flow for 2019 and average temperature from 2003–2018 at Manton Road Bridge...... 45 Figure 12. Main stem Battle Creek mean daily flow and water temperature at the Coleman National Fish Hatchery (CNFH) barrier weir for 2019...... 46 Figure 13. Percent of spring Chinook redds located above the old Wildcat Dam site (removed November 2010) on the North Fork of Battle Creek...... 47 Figure 14. The annual total number of unclipped spring-run Chinook Salmon (i.e., maximum potential spring Chinook Salmon) passed above the Coleman National Fish Hatchery barrier weir on Battle Creek from 1995 to 2019...... 48

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report viii U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

List of Appendices

Table A.1. Coded-wire tags for recovered Chinook Salmon (Chinook) collected during Coleman National Fish Hatchery (CNFH) spawning building (SB) operations 2019...... 50 Table A.2. Multiyear coded-wire tag recovered during Coleman National Fish Hatchery (CNFH) spawning building (SB) operations, barrier weir trapping (BWT), snorkel surveys (SS), and fish rescues (FR)...... 55

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report ix U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

Introduction

Battle Creek is an important watershed to the conservation and recovery of three species of anadromous salmonids federally listed as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) in the Central Valley of California. Restoration actions and projects, planned or underway in Battle Creek, focus on providing habitat for these federally listed species: the endangered winter-run Chinook Salmon (winter Chinook) Oncorhynchus tshawytscha, threatened spring-run Chinook Salmon (spring Chinook), and threatened Central Valley steelhead trout O. mykiss. We use the terms O. mykiss to refer to both the stream resident (Rainbow Trout) and anadromous (steelhead) life histories because of the difficulties in differentiating the anadromous and resident forms in the field. The geographic range of winter Chinook is currently limited to a single population in the main stem of the Sacramento River between Keswick Dam and Red Bluff, California, which makes it susceptible to catastrophic loss (Figure 1). Establishing a second winter Chinook population in Battle Creek may reduce the possibility of extinction and is priority in the National Marine Fisheries Service Central Valley Salmonid Recovery Plan (NMFS 2014). Battle Creek also has the potential to support significant self-sustaining populations of spring Chinook and O. mykiss; these populations could be critical for the recovery of these species in our area. A hydroelectric power generating system of dams, diversions, canals, and powerhouses, titled the Battle Creek Hydroelectric Project (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission license P- 1121), currently owned by Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) has operated in the watershed within Shasta and Tehama counties, California, since the early 1900’s. This hydropower system has had severe impacts on anadromous salmonids and their habitat (Ward and Kier 1999). In 1992 the Central Valley Project Improvement Act (CVPIA) federally legislated programs to attempt to double populations of Central Valley salmonids (USFWS 2001). The CVPIA Anadromous Fisheries Restoration Program outlined several actions necessary to restore Battle Creek including “increasing flows past PG&E’s hydropower diversions in two phases” and “providing adequate holding, spawning, and rearing habitat for anadromous salmonids” (USFWS 2001). The CVPIA Water Acquisition Program increased minimum flows of 3 cubic feet per second (cfs) in North Fork Battle Creek (hereafter, North Fork) and 5 cfs in South Fork Battle Creek (hereafter, South Fork) to 25 cfs below Eagle Canyon Dam in the North Fork and 35 cfs below Coleman Dam in the South Fork from 1995 to 2001 (Brown and Newton 2002). A Memorandum of Understanding was signed in 1999 stating there would be continued support from federal agencies, state agencies, and PG&E in the development of the Battle Creek Salmon and Steelhead Restoration Project (BCRP; NMFS et al. 1999). The goal of the BCRP is to restore and enhance 42 miles of anadromous fish habitat in Battle Creek and six miles of habitat in its tributaries, while minimizing the loss of renewable energy. This goal will be achieved by implementing changes to the infrastructure and operations at PG&E hydropower facilities in Battle Creek, including the removal of five dams, constructing new fish ladders and screens at three dams, and increasing instream flows. The CALFED Bay-Delta Program originally provided funding for the BCRP; however, planning, designing, and permitting for the BCRP took much longer than anticipated. Therefore, money was contributed from Ecosystem Restoration Program of CALFED to fund the Interim Flow Project, which purchased water in 2001 allowing flows in North Fork to remain above 3 cfs (Brown and Newton 2002), and an agreement was reached in 2002–2003 to include the South Fork (Alston et al. 2007). The Interim

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 1 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

Flow Project will continue until the construction of BCRP is complete. Following the completion of the BCRP, project flows will be provided by PG&E below diversions on North and South Forks as prescribed in the Battle Creek Restoration Plan (Restoration Plan; Ward and Kier 1999). Habitat restoration actions identified in the BCRP were initially projected to be completed in 2004, but delays have prolonged its completion. In an effort to start the construction of the project, the BCRP was implemented in three phases: Phase 1A, 1B, and 2. Phase 1A focused on North Fork, and construction activities included: the removal of Wildcat Diversion Dam and its associated pipeline; installation of new fish screens and ladders at North Fork Feeder Diversion Dam and Eagle Canyon Diversion Dam; and construction of a fish barrier on Baldwin Creek, a tributary to Battle Creek. Phase 1A construction activities were completed in 2013; however, the ladders and screens remain closed because additional work and testing were required to show the facilities were fail-safe before PG&E acceptance. Completion and acceptance by PG&E of Phase 1A is anticipated in 2021. Phase 1B entailed construction activities associated with the Inskip Powerhouse penstock bypass and tailrace connector, which directs mixed North Fork and South Fork water directly into the Coleman Canal. Construction of the penstock bypass and tailrace connector has been completed and accepted. Currently the Inskip Powerhouse is nonoperational, so PG&E is only using the penstock bypass. The final phase of the BCRP construction activities, Phase 2, would focus on South Fork and its tributaries, including installation of a fish screen and ladder at the Inskip Diversion Dam; construction of a tailrace connector from South Powerhouse to Inskip Canal; and removal of Lower Ripley Creek Feeder Dam, Coleman Diversion Dam, Soap Creek Feeder Dam, and South Diversion Dam. However, PG&E announced in the summer of 2018 that the company will not seek to relicense the Battle Creek Hydroelectric Project. This announcement has created substantial uncertainty about the timing and completion of the remaining habitat restoration actions in Battle Creek. Given this recent decision, the Memorandum of Understanding partners agreed in 2019 to continue implementing select portions of the BCRP on South Fork, including the removal of the four dams to be completed by 2024 (USBR 2020). Restoration actions requiring new construction are suspended, including completion the new fish ladder and screen at Inskip Dam and the tailrace connector at South Powerhouse, which is needed to reduce or eliminate inter-basin transfers. The potential also exists that the hydropower project is altered or decommissioned, and there is no timeline for a final decision. In addition to the BCRP construction, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) modified a known rock barrier (Earley 2016; Bottaro and Earley 2018) downstream of Eagle Canyon Dam in 2012, in attempt to improve fish passage on North Fork. Following those efforts, designs have been completed and plans are underway to modify this barrier and another known rock barrier upstream of Eagle Canyon Dam. This project will assure passage upstream of Eagle Canyon Dam to and above North Fork Feeder Dam. The permitting for the project has been completed (Tehama Environmental Solutions, Inc. 2020) and FWS has entered into an agreement for implementation. Currently, Phase 1 of the project, focusing on the barrier upstream of Eagle Canyon Dam is underway and the project should be completed in October 2021. Phase 2 is anticipated to begin in fall 2021 and completed in summer 2022, although FWS is still working to establish landowner access agreements for this phase. A major component of the BCRP is providing access to habitats that could sustain endangered Sacramento River Winter-run Chinook Salmon. Since natural colonization is unlikely, human intervention was necessary, thus CDFW, NMFS, and USFWS (herein referred to as the Resource Agencies) along with PG&E developed the Battle Creek Winter-run Chinook

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 2 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

Salmon Reintroduction Plan (ICF International 2016). This plan was designed to guide the implementation of the reintroduction efforts after the completion of restoration activities in the watershed. During the drought of 2014–2015 natural production of winter Chinook in the Sacramento River was severely diminished thereby increasing the risk of imminent extinction. In response, the Resource Agencies decided to jump-start the reintroduction efforts to increase the resiliency of the population and reduce the risk of extinction (USFWS 2017). These efforts have been termed the Battle Creek Jumpstart Project. In 2017 the project utilized captive broodstock from Livingston Stone National Fish Hatchery to produce fertilized eggs. Eyed eggs and in some cases newly emerged fry were transferred to Coleman National Fish Hatchery (CNFH) to increase imprinting to the watershed. These fish were raised until pre-smolt size and released at Wildcat Road Bridge on the North Fork to further promote imprinting to the best spawning habitats higher in the drainage. Approximately 215,000 juvenile winter Chinook were released from this site in March 2018 (USFWS 2018). The Resource Agencies decided to continue these efforts, and the USFWS developed a plan to transition from the Jumpstart Project to the formal Reintroduction Program (USFWS 2020). Subsequent releases have been made in North Fork in 2019 (approximately 182,000 juveniles), in 2020 (approximately 180,000 juveniles), and are planned to continue in the near future. These fish are referred to as Jumpstart winter-run Chinook Salmon (Jumpstart winter Chinook). A cohort of age-2 “jacks” that were part of the initial 2018 juvenile release group began returning to Battle Creek in 2019. This report will summarize the adult Jumpstart winter Chinook observations made in 2019. The goal of our monitoring program is to provide fisheries information for the adaptive management of anadromous salmonid restoration in Battle Creek including the Interim Flow Project and the BCRP. The Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office (RBFWO) conducted investigations in 2019 under an Interagency Agreement with the United States Bureau of Reclamation (USBR). This agreement was intended to continue the monitoring activities used to determine species status relative to the Central Valley Project and the State Water Project long- term operations outlined in the Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives in the Biological Opinion issued to USBR (NMFS 2009). These monitoring activities include most of the monitoring needs described in the BCRP’s Adaptive Management Plan (Terraqua Inc. 2004). The remaining monitoring not covered by the USBR agreement was funded by Iron Mountain Mine Trustee Council. Our monitoring investigations included: (1) salmonid escapement estimates at the CNFH barrier weir fish ladder, (2) stream surveys documenting salmonid spawning distributions, and (3) juvenile salmonid production estimates (not included in this report). Tables summarizing data from previous years are included in this report (Table 1–Table 6).

Study Area

Battle Creek is located in southern Shasta and northern Tehama counties, California. The headwaters originate in the volcanic slopes of Lassen Peak in the southern Cascade Range where snow pack and numerous springs flow into the creek until it ultimately enters the Sacramento River east of the town of Cottonwood, California, which is 272 river miles from the confluence with the San Joaquin River near Collinsville, CA. The Battle Creek watershed covers 369 square miles and is comprised of the North Fork (approximately 30.0 miles), the South Fork (approximately 30.2 miles), and the main stem (16.8 miles from the confluence of the forks to the Sacramento River) along with many associated tributaries. Battle Creek has been described as having a great potential for fisheries restoration because of its relatively high and consistent

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 3 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

flow of cold water (Terraqua Inc. 2004). It has the highest base flow (dry-season flow) of any tributary to the Sacramento River between the Feather River and Keswick Dam (RM 80.0 and 302.0, respectively; Ward and Kier 1999). The study area includes the CNFH barrier weir on the main stem Battle Creek (RM 6.0), upstream to Eagle Canyon Dam (RM 5.2) on the North Fork, and Coleman Diversion Dam (RM 2.5) on the South Fork (Figure 2). Eagle Canyon Dam and Coleman Diversion Dam are the current upstream limits to anadromy because fish ladders at these dams have been closed until PG&E accepts the facilities on the North Fork and until after the Phase 2 is completed. Construction of an improved CNFH barrier weir and fish ladder was completed in fall 2008, and the design and components for the fish ladder have been described in previous Battle Creek adult reports (Bottaro and Earley 2018; Figure 3). The new ladder design consists of the barrier weir (blocking upstream passage), the middle fish ladder (where video monitoring occurs), an auxiliary ladder (which controls flow in the middle ladder), a hatchery ladder (which leads to holding ponds and the spawning building), and a river ladder leading to Battle Creek upstream of the weir.

Methods

RBFWO staff used the CNFH spawning building, video counts, and stream surveys to monitor adult salmonids in Battle Creek between March and November 2019. Chinook and O. mykiss returning to Battle Creek were classified as either unclipped (adipose fin present) or clipped (adipose fin absent). All clipped Chinook and O. mykiss were considered to be hatchery- origin (HOR) and unclipped Chinook to be either natural origin (NOR) or HOR because not all hatchery Chinook are clipped. Unclipped Chinook returning to Battle Creek during our monitoring period are most likely spring Chinook; however, it is possible that some unclipped Chinook Salmon are late-fall run (late-fall Chinook), winter, or fall-run (fall Chinook) due to overlapping periods of migration; therefore, we did not classify all unclipped Chinook as spring Chinook. Tissue samples collected from Jumpstart winter Chinook were analyzed to confirm run designations of specimens collected during spawning building operations; however, no tissue samples were collected from fish that were observed during video monitoring. Jumpstart winter Chinook were uniquely marked with both the adipose fin (clipped) and left pelvic fin removed making them easily distinguishable from unclipped spring Chinook during video footage review. Although the secondary pelvic clip was sometimes difficult to observe from video footage, the unique phenotypic characteristics and later migration timing for these fish relative to clipped late-fall Chinook Salmon make misidentification unlikely. All unclipped O. mykiss are considered to be NOR as CNFH has clipped 100% of their steelhead production since 1998. Coleman National Fish Hatchery barrier weir The CNFH barrier weir (the barrier weir) blocked upstream passage of fish through the upriver fish ladder from August 1, 2018, to March 3, 2019. During this period, fish were periodically directed into holding ponds at CNFH where fall Chinook, late-fall Chinook, and O. mykiss were used in propagation programs. Fish passage was monitored at the CNFH spawning building facility starting March 4. The duration of processing fish using the spawning building facilities was lengthened in 2019 to intercept Jumpstart winter Chinook adults returning for the first time this year, which allowed tissue samples to be collected. These Jumpstart winter Chinook were collected and ultimately transported to LSNFH for inclusion as broodstock for the Jumpstart Project. On July 17, 2019, the hatchery ladder was closed, the main bulkhead was removed from the river ladder, and all fish passage into upper Battle Creek was monitored in the

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 4 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

middle ladder by video surveillance (Figure 3). Video was also used to monitor the upstream passage of Pacific Lamprey Entosphenus tridentatus during spawning building operations, since they can pass through the screened auxiliary ladder and upstream into Battle Creek; other larger- bodied fish species are incapable of passage via this route. During the overnight periods of April 16–17 and April 30–May 1 (Table 7, Table 8), the hatchery ladder was closed coupled with the opening of the river ladder for approximately 11 and 12 hours, respectively. This temporarily permitted passage of other species of Sacramento River native fishes (identified in following section) that are otherwise blocked from passing upstream during spawning building operations, which has been observed and discussed in previous annual reports (Bottaro and Earley 2018). The timings of these actions were planned to coincide with these species’ tributary migration periods that have been observed in previous years’ video monitoring in late-April; they were dubbed “Foothill Species Assemblage Liberations” (Foothill Liberations). Video monitoring was used to enumerate fish passing upstream during these periods. Spawning building — During March CNFH staff used the first holding pond and a mechanical crowding device to concentrate fish into a long channel. Once crowded, a second metal crowding device was pushed through this channel to route the fish into the CNFH spawning building. However, a mechanical failure of the crowding system occurred in late March. At this time, doors in the crowding system were left open thus allowing fish to pass directly into the spawning building. RBFWO staff identified fish to species, enumerated, and released all unclipped salmonids and other native fishes including Sacramento Sucker Catostomus occidentalis (Suckers), Hardheads Mylopharodon conocephalus, Pacific Lamprey (adults), and Sacramento Pikeminnow Ptychocheilus grandis upstream into Battle Creek. Zero non-native fish were captured during our 2019 monitoring, but protocol is that all non-native fish captured during our spawning building operations are to be released downstream of the barrier weir. Fork length (to 0.5 cm) was recorded for all salmonids and gender was identified when possible. Fish were inspected for scars, tissue damage, and for the presence of markings such as an adipose-fin clip, pelvic fin clip, Floy tag, or Visible Implant Elastomer (VIE) tag. A tissue sample was taken from each unclipped Chinook and O. mykiss for future analysis and archived at RBFWO (described in Tissue collection for genetic analyses section below). All fish passed through spawning building fish processing facilities terminating at an elevator that deposits collected fish into a small tank charged with carbon dioxide. This solution anesthetizes fish prior to handling; however, prolonged immersion in the solution can be harmful. To mitigate this effect, fish were processed quickly in small batches to minimize this exposure. After processing, all NOR fish were passed through the spawning building facility’s release pipes back into Battle Creek upstream of the barrier weir. All HOR Chinook excluding Jumpstart winter Chinook were sacrificed in order to extract coded-wire tags (CWT), which were later decoded to determine run designation, hatchery of origin, and age (Table A.1). Jumpstart winter Chinook were processed in the same manner as NOR fish excepting that afterwards they were temporarily stored in holding tanks at CNFH before being transported to Livingston Stone National Fish Hatchery via a specialized tanker truck for inclusion as Jumpstart broodstock. Clipped O. mykiss were transported to a CNFH holding pond and fish were used in the CNFH reconditioning program where all clipped fish receive a Passive Integrated Transponder tag. Video passage enumeration — The improved fish ladder has an open-air monitoring vault adjacent to the middle ladder. There is a 2.25 m2 viewing window between the vault and

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 5 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

middle ladder, which allows for the observation of fish passage. A fish crowding device in the middle ladder guides fish to within 46 cm of the viewing window. Our video surveillance system included a digital color video camera (Toshiba IK-65WDA with a 2.8–12 mm variable lens; Toshiba, Tokyo, Japan), approximately 390 m of RG11 coaxial cable, and a Honeywell Fusion digital video recorder (Model HFDVR1612012; Honeywell International Inc., Louisville, KY). The Digital Video Recorder (DVR) transferred video data daily to an external hard drive (1 TB Hard Drive, Seagate Technology, Cupertino, CA). The RG11 coaxial cable carried the signal from the camera to the DVR located in our field office (Anderson Field Office) at CNFH. For backup purposes, the video signal was also routed from the Honeywell DVR into a low capacity DVR (4CH MPEG-4 DVR; Model DMR27U; Supercircuits, Inc., Austin, TX). The backup footage was checked on the external hard drive, and if any missing video was observed it could be replaced from the backup drive, which was cleared every 9 d. A fluorescent lighting system in the vault allowed for 24-hr monitoring. Two channels were used for the DVR: one channel for continuous and one for motion detection, with both recording at 30 frames-per-second. The continuous channel recorded uninterruptedly during the monitoring period, and the motion channel recorded four seconds before and four seconds after the motion detection was triggered. The Honeywell’s built in software allows you to draw polygons (in our case three rectangular polygons) over the recorded area and apply settings that will trigger the camera to record when an object crosses the specified area. The software also allows you to set how sensitive the polygons are to a disturbance by passing objects. The sensitivity settings range is from 1 to 20 with one being the most sensitive to a disturbance passing within the polygons to 20 being the least sensitive. A sensitivity setting of 14 was used for the entire season. As previously stated, video surveillance started on March 4 to monitor Pacific Lamprey. This video monitoring persisted during our spawning building operations including both Foothill Liberations when volitional passage into upper Battle Creek was permitted, video footage reviewed, and passage data recorded. The bulkhead allowing access to the river ladder was removed when spawning building operations ceased July 18, after which all fish species passing through the fish ladder were monitored and enumerated using the underwater video surveillance system. On August 1 the main ladder entrance was closed and the river ladder bulkhead was installed to prevent fall Chinook from passing the barrier weir. After August 1 RBFWO staff continued to monitor Pacific Lamprey passage upstream until September 1 when all video equipment was removed and the main entrance to the fish ladder was closed for a month in anticipation of fish Chinook broodstock collection. The video monitoring was continuous during the period of volitional passage, and there were no periods of outage or poor footage for which passage data would need extrapolation. Instream flow and turbidity were stable throughout the shortened 2019 video monitoring period. Video footage was primarily reviewed in motion detection mode. The person reviewing the day fast-forwards through the recorded footage until a fish is observed and then a frame-by- frame mode is used to identify the fish. All observations of salmonids were given a rating (good, fair, or poor) of how confident the reviewer was in their observation. A good rating signified complete confidence in determining species and the presence or absence of an adipose fin, a fair rating suggested confidence in determining species and the presence or absence of an adipose fin but additional review was needed, and a poor rating suggested uncertainty in determining species and the presence or absence of an adipose fin. All other species were considered “a good rating”, and if they could not be identified to species they would be marked as an unknown non-salmonid

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 6 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

for later review. All Chinook that passed through the video were classified as late-fall, winter, or spring Chinook depending on their presence or absence of secondary sexual characteristics, migration timing, and spawning coloration. Since 2009 all O. mykiss were categorized into two different size classes: 12 to 16 inches or 16 inches and over. O. mykiss less than 12 inches long were not considered adult and could potentially pass through the bar rack system avoiding detection; for these reasons they were not counted in season totals. For quality assurance (QA), every third day of video footage was reviewed again to detect human error of missing a passing fish. Human error has consistently been the most frequent origin of errors made in the reading of video footage. This second review was made by a more experienced crewmember: someone that has had more than one season of identifying fish through video surveillance. If footage was considered poor quality due to turbidity, that period would be added to our QA schedule for review in continuous footage to make sure all fish were captured by the motion detection. All fish were matched with fish observed in the motion detection mode. If a fish was observed in the first read but not the second, the verifier would go back and determine if it was a computer error or a human error. All previously unobserved fish were added to the final data. After the QA process was completed, every salmonid seen by continuous or motion detection was verified, and a final call on clip status and a run designation was made. These QA measures were used to identify any viewer errors and the reads in continuous footage were used to compensate for any computer errors due to high turbidities. In 2013 a small angled ramp was added to the downstream side of the crowding wall that guided fish past the window. The ramp was designed to increase detections of Pacific Lamprey by the motion detection system. This “lamprey ramp” encouraged Pacific Lamprey to move higher in the viewing area thereby increasing the chances of the motion detection system to capture their footage. Further design information can be found in Bottaro and Earley (2018). Migration timing — Migration timing past the barrier weir was determined using the combination of data from the spawning building and video monitoring. The number of unclipped and clipped Chinook and O. mykiss passing the barrier weir was summed weekly. Onset, peak, and the end of migration were noted. Size, sex, and age composition — Fork length and sex were recorded for all salmonids captured and processed in the spawning building and from carcasses retrieved during stream surveys. The age of returning Chinook was determined for coded-wire tagged fish and length-at- age plots were developed. Length-frequency distributions were established and male-to-female sex ratios were calculated, except for spring Chinook because of the difficulty determining sex before the appearance of secondary sexual characteristics. Stream surveys Annual snorkel surveys for spring Chinook occurred August through November. The primary purpose of these surveys was to obtain a count of all spring Chinook redds and to document their spatial distribution. These surveys were usually conducted immediately before spawning, during peak spawning, and after spawning had concluded for the season. Full-stream surveys were scheduled on consecutive weekdays beginning at the uppermost reaches and working downstream. The 18.6-mile survey was divided into six reaches upstream of the barrier weir (Figure 2) and typically took 4–5 days to complete depending on personnel availability and flow conditions. Three snorkelers swam downstream recording all live adult Chinook, carcasses, and redds encountered during the survey. Waypoints and data were collected on each observation using a handheld GPS receiver (Mesa 2 Rugged Tablet with external receiver, Juniper Systems,

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 7 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

Logan, UT). These waypoints were later imported into Geographic Information Systems (GIS) software (ArcGIS Environmental Systems Resource Institute, Redlands, CA) for analysis. To identify live Chinook, snorkelers would swim adjacent to each other in a line perpendicular to the flow. When entering large plunge pools where Chinook could be concealed below bubble curtains, one snorkeler would walk around and enter at the downstream end of the pool, while the other two snorkelers would enter through the bubble curtain to flush Chinook out. When groups of Chinook were encountered, snorkelers would confer with each other to make sure salmon were not missed or double-counted. The number of redds per reach and the date each redd was first observed were recorded. All redds were aged and marked with flagging and given an identification number in order to differentiate between old and new redds. Redd age was categorized as one of five classes: 1) in progress (this category was not used as only fully developed redds were counted); 2) fully developed with well-defined pit and tail-spill; 3) older with flattened tail spill, fine sediment or algae growth in pit; 4) shape of redd completely flattened and hard to discern; and 5) redd no longer visible. When survey personnel encountered redds from a previous survey, the redds were aged again so that the survey personnel could note if the redd had grown, aged, or if superimposition had occurred with development of a new redd. Physical data was also collected including dominant substrate used, length, width, depth, and the flow immediately upstream of the redd. When carcasses were encountered by survey personnel, biological data was recorded using the Mesa 2 Tablet GPS and tissue samples were collected (described in Tissue collection for genetic analyses section below) for future analyses. Scales were removed from the left side of the fish at the second or third row of scales above the lateral line in the region bisected by a line drawn between the back of the dorsal fin and the front of the anal fin. Scales were later dried for 24 hours and stored in “Rite in the Rain” ® paper envelopes (JL Darling LLC, Tacoma, WA). Otoliths were removed, dried, and stored in dry plastic sample vials at RBFWO. Heads were collected from all adipose-fin clipped carcasses and from carcasses where the presence of a fin clip could not be determined because of predation or decomposition. Coded-wire tags were later extracted from heads in the laboratory and decoded. The biological information collected included FL, sex, egg retention, adipose fin (presence or absence), carcass condition (fresh or non-fresh), presence of any tags, and spawning status. The spawning status for females was noted as spawned, unspawned, or unknown either due to predation or decomposition. Male spawning status was always considered unknown. Stream discharge data, water turbidity, and water temperature were collected for each survey. Stream flow was measured at three gauging stations operated by California Department of Water Resources (DWR) and the US Geological Survey (USGS). One gauging station was below all the reaches on the main stem Battle Creek (BAT; USGS 11376550) below CNFH (main stem Battle Creek RM 6.0). The other two gauging stations were located on the North Fork (BNF) near Wildcat Bridge (North Fork RM 0.9) and on the South Fork (BAS) near Manton Road Bridge (South Fork RM 1.7). Turbidity samples were taken at the beginning and end of each reach and analyzed at the end of the day using a turbidimeter (Model 2100Q; Hach Company, Loveland, CO). An average turbidity value was later calculated for each survey day. For surveys during which a turbidity vial was lost or only one turbidity sample was taken, that value was used for the overall survey. Water temperatures were collected at 30-min intervals

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 8 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office using a digital temperature logger (HOBO Water Pro V2TM; Onset Computer Corporation, Bourne, MA) and summarized to reflect the temperatures within the survey reach. Holding temperatures, spawning location and timing — After locating Chinook redds, we estimated time of spawning using the date and age of redd information. River miles were retrieved from GIS data for each redd. This information was used to evaluate distribution and thermal criteria. Thermal criteria were modified from Ward and Kier (1999) to evaluate the suitability of water temperatures in Battle Creek for spring Chinook egg incubation. A fifth category of < 56 degrees Fahrenheit (°F) was added to Ward and Kier’s four-category system (Table 9). This additional category was added because other Central Valley streams have 56°F as an optimal temperature target for Chinook egg incubation (USFWS 2001; NMFS 2002). The five categories were defined as excellent, good, fair, poor, and very poor. Mean daily temperature were interpolated for each redd by using the equation of a straight-line connecting two adjacent temperature monitoring sites (Giovannetti and Brown 2008). The estimated time to emergence was estimated for each redd by using daily temperature units which were calculated by subtracting 32°F from the mean daily temperature. Based on rotary screw trap data (described in separate report) from Battle Creek, 1,850 daily temperature units are normally needed for development, emergence, and capture in the rotary screw trap (M. Schraml, unpublished data, USFWS; Giovannetti and Brown 2008). In order to cover 100% of the incubation time for each redd, we used the daily temperature units that are needed for capture at the rotary screw trap. Using the incubation date we summarized the water temperatures during that time period as well as the temperatures using two time windows, minimum and maximum exposure time, which were based on the date and age of the redd when it was first observed (Table 10). If the redd was aged as a 2, the minimum exposure time would start the day before the observation, assuming at the very least the redd was built the day prior. If the redd was aged as a 3, the minimum exposure time would start the week before, following the assumption that the redd was built between the two surveys. The maximum exposure time for both age 2 and 3 redds would start the day after the previous survey or two weeks before. Temperatures were summarized based on the five categories modified from Ward and Kier (1999). Tissue collection for genetic analyses Tissue samples were collected from adult unclipped Chinook and O. mykiss in the spawning building and from carcasses collected during stream surveys. RBFWO staff used either scissors or a hole punch to obtain three or four small pieces of fin tissue. These pieces were stored in small vials containing ethanol, and one was dried and stored in a “Rite in the Rain” ® paper envelope (no dry samples were collected in the spawning building). All samples were archived and stored at the RBFWO. Spring Chinook population trend analysis Passage of adult spring Chinook into upper Battle Creek has been monitored for 25 consecutive years (1995–2019). A simple linear regression was used to determine the population trend for this period. “Year” was treated as the independent (predictor) variable and the annual total number of unclipped Chinook (a.k.a. maximum potential spring Chinook) was treated as the dependent (response) variable. The slope of the regression line can be used as a measure of trend.

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 9 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

Results

Coleman National Fish Hatchery barrier weir Spawning building operations — All NOR fish encountered during our monitoring were passed upstream of CNFH barrier weir after processing. During the CNFH broodstock collection and spawning program from January to March 2019, 66 unclipped late-fall Chinook were processed and passed upstream into Battle Creek (Table 1); however, none were encountered during our monitoring from March-July. Thirty-eight live spring Chinook were processed and released upstream during our operations. Additionally, one incidental spring Chinook mortality was encountered during end-of-season maintenance of spawning building facilities Week 20A (Table 7). The apparent cause of death was being crushed by an exclusion gate used to contain fish after being crowded within the spawning facility. Also, 84 unclipped Rainbow trout/steelhead were processed during our operations and released upstream. In addition to salmonids, 321 Suckers, 213 Hardhead, 79 Sacramento Pikeminnow, and notably 5 Pacific Lamprey (adults) were processed and passed upstream. This is the first recorded instance of Pacific Lamprey successfully navigating through the spawning building facilities to the processing area; one passed via this route while the remaining four were encountered in drained holding pools inside of the spawning building facilities during the end-of-season maintenance and transported via watered buckets to be released upstream of the CNFH barrier weir. The hatchery ladder does not have specific accommodations to allow lamprey passage, and it has been presumed that navigating the ladder into the spawning building via this route would be difficult for lamprey. Hatchery-origin Fish — All HOR fish processed during spawning building operations were denied access upstream into upper Battle Creek, excepting one instance discussed below. Late-fall Chinook — All 81 late-fall Chinook processed in the spawning building during our monitoring period from March 4–July 18 were clipped and, therefore, sacrificed after processing to subsequently remove CWT (Table A.1, Table A.2). The sex ratio of this group was roughly 1:2 with 26 males and 55 females. Spring Chinook — A single clipped Chinook was mistakenly passed upstream on June 13. This Chinook was classified as a potential HOR spring Chinook with identification based upon phenotypic characteristics. Also, one fish that was visually identified as a clipped spring Chinook was collected in the spawning building July 9, tissue sample collected for genetic analysis, sacrificed, and the head was removed for CWT removal; however, this head was lost. We have chosen to report this fish as a potential HOR spring Chinook of Feather River Hatchery-origin based upon phenotypic characteristics. Tissue samples were collected from the two fish in question and are intended for inclusion in upcoming genetic analysis; however, these results were not yet available at the time of this report. We include these fish in escapement totals for spring Chinook classifying them as HOR spring Chinook salmon based on visual identification with the intent to verify run designation by genetic analysis and update escapement totals, if necessary, in future reports.

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 10 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

Winter Chinook — Seventy-four Jumpstart winter Chinook were collected and routed to LSNFH for inclusion as broodstock in the Jumpstart Project, excepting one individual that lacked the secondary mark of a left-pelvic fin clip thought to have possible been due to an error during marking of this group. This fish was released in the Sacramento River upstream of Battle Creek under the assumption that it was a HOR winter Chinook originating from LSNFH, which was later confirmed by genetic analysis of collected tissue sample. Fall Chinook — Two fall Chinook, one male and one female, were captured in the spawning building and sacrificed. Interpretation of the collected CWTs revealed that these fish were both from CNFH of the 2016 broodyear (Table A.1). O. mykiss — Additionally, 51 clipped Rainbow trout/steelhead were captured and held in CNFH holding ponds, subsequently implanted with Passive Integrated Transponders, and included in the CNFH reconditioning program. Video passage enumeration — Fish passage was monitored during two Foothill Liberations on April 16–17 and April 30–May 1. Within these two brief periods, two unclipped spring Chinook and four Jumpstart winter Chinook were observed passing upstream. Additionally, 3,045 Suckers, nine Pacific Lamprey (adults), eight unclipped Rainbow trout/steelhead, and two Hardhead passed upstream cumulatively during these two events. Nearly all Suckers moved upstream on April 17 shortly after the bulkhead was moved. No fall nor late-fall Chinook were observed passing our video monitoring station into upper Battle Creek throughout our entire monitoring season. All fish passage was directed through the main river ladder after July 18, when the upstream bulkhead was removed and the hatchery ladder entry was closed. Three spring Chinook and 19 Jumpstart winter Chinook were observed passing upstream through the video monitoring location between July 18 and August 1. During this period, Chinook Salmon passed upstream through the middle ladder primarily during daylight hours with a lull in passage from 2100–2400 hrs (Figure 4). All Jumpstart winter Chinook observed during video monitoring were grilse-sized and assumed to be male based on phenotypic similarity to hand-processed fish of this population, which were all male. We observed a net upstream passage of only three Rainbow trout/steelhead of the 12–16 inch size class and zero greater than 16 inches, although numerous individual upstream and downstream passes were recorded by video watchers from both size classes. The repeated upstream and downstream movement of specific fishes was noted in the comments of video readers indicating that many of these fish may be trout resident to Battle Creek using the ladder to travel between upper and lower sections. Both clipped and unclipped Rainbow trout/steelhead passed upstream through the middle ladder primarily during daylight hours with a lull in passage from 0000–0600 hrs (Figure 5). Other species observed passing upstream included 513 Suckers, 240 Sacramento Pikeminnows, 151 Hardheads, and 29 Pacific Lamprey; lamprey are nocturnal and were typically observed during nighttime, whereas other species listed primarily passed during daylight hours. The video surveillance system successfully recorded 100% of the monitoring period from July 18 through August 1; there were no periods of outage or poor footage for which passage estimation using interpolated values was necessary. Precipitation events resulting in increased flow and turbidity, the primary cause of video outages in previous years, are rare in our study area during late-July. The motion detection system detected 100% of Chinook and O. mykiss with no computer error. During QA checks, only one instance human error was found where a

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 11 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

video reader misidentified a Jumpstart winter Chinook and a Rainbow trout/steelhead; this error was corrected after detection. Based on the results of our data quality checks, no salmonid passage was missed (i.e., observed by one yet not the other video reader) by either initial video reads or QA reads. Escapement totals — Total escapement of Chinook Salmon to Battle Creek during our monitoring period was 292 fish (Table 3) with 133 of those passing upstream of CNFH barrier weir. During spawning building operations, 66 unclipped late-fall Chinook were hand-processed and passed upstream during January and February. During March and April, 81 clipped, CNFH- origin late-fall Chinook were collected in the spawning building and sacrificed. A total of 95 Jumpstart winter Chinook returned to Battle Creek; 74 were hand-processed and routed to LSNFH, and 21 were observed passing upstream via video monitoring. One LSNFH-origin winter Chinook was captured at CNFH and subsequently was transported to the Sacramento River via tanker trunk where it was released. A total of 47 spring Chinook returned to Battle Creek; 46 passed upstream, which includes one clipped fish passed upstream during spawning building operations by error. Additionally, one clipped fish that was visually identified as a spring Chinook was sacrificed in order to remove CWT; however, the CWT was subsequently lost. Two fall Chinook were captured and sacrificed in the spawning building in late-June and July. It should be noted that the two fall Chinook were initially identified as potentially HOR spring Chinook based on phenotype (i.e., similar in appearance to the fish for which the CWT was lost) prior to CWT analysis. Additive to Chinook Salmon escapement, 81 clipped Rainbow trout/steelhead were captured in the spawning building and transferred to CNFH holding ponds. One clipped Rainbow trout/steelhead and 221 unclipped Rainbow trout/steelhead passed upstream of the barrier weir. Finally, the following net totals of non-salmonid species passed upstream during our monitoring period: 3879 Suckers, 366 Hardheads, 319 Sacramento Pikeminnows, and 43 Pacific Lamprey. Migration timing — Based on both data collected during spawning building operations and video monitoring, the migration of unclipped spring Chinook past the barrier weir began with the first fish encountered in the spawning building on March 27 and peaked the week of May 26 (Figure 6). The middle 50% of the run passed between May 16 and June 15. The last unclipped Chinook was observed on July 25. The timing of the migration of Jumpstart winter Chinook was similar to spring Chinook with peak migration on the same week. The first Jumpstart winter Chinook was processed in the spawning building on May 5, and the last was observed during video monitoring on July 30. Oncorhynchus mykiss migrating past the barrier weir exhibited a different migration pattern to previous years. A bimodal migration pattern has been typical, but in 2019 we observed more passage in the beginning of the season that slowly tapered off toward the end of the season (Figure 7), especially low during afternoon hours when water temperatures were near the daily maximum. Size, sex, and age composition — The majority of fish captured in the CNFH spawning building were HOR late-fall Chinook (n = 81) with a mean FL of 71.6 cm and ranged from 48.5 to 86.5 cm (Figure 8). The length frequency distribution of this group was continuous and approximately normal with a mode of 73.0 cm. The sex ratio (male:female) for sampled late-fall Chinook was 1:2.1. Natural-origin spring Chinook (n = 39) captured in the spawning building had a mean FL of 72.7 cm and ranged from 50.0 to 82.0 cm. The length frequency distribution of this group was continuous and approximately normal with a mode of 77.0 cm. We were unable

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 12 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

to determine the sex ratio for spring Chinook because these fish typically lack identifiable secondary sexual characteristics when encountered in the spawning building during our monitoring period. Tissue samples for intended genetic analysis were collected that could provide sexual determinations for these fish; however, these samples were not analyzed to determine sex at the time of this report. Jumpstart winter Chinook captured in the spawning building had a mean FL of 53.6 cm and ranged from 44.5 to 54.0 cm, which was significantly smaller than other groups. The length frequency distribution of this group was continuous and approximately normal with a mode of 54.0 cm. All Jumpstart winter Chinook were 2-years-old, which is known because all were initially released into Battle Creek in 2018 part of the reintroduction of HOR pre-smolt sized fish. All Jumpstart winter Chinook processed in 2019 were male (1:0). Two fall Chinook, one male and one female, were captured in the spawning building, and had FL = 73.0 cm and 72.5 cm, respectively. Collected CWT information revealed that these fish were both age-3 and originated from CNFH. Clipped O. mykiss averaged 44.0 cm FL, which is larger than unclipped O. mykiss that averaged 36.1 cm (Figure 9). The length frequency distribution for each of these groups was continuous and approximately normal with modes of 45.0 cm and 35.0 cm for clipped (n = 81) and unclipped O. mykiss (n = 85), respectively. Tagging records were used to determine the age of Chinook captured with CWTs in the spawning building. The ages of clipped Chinook included a 2-year old (n = 1), 3-year-olds (n = 78) and 4-year-olds (n = 4). Fork lengths for age 4 fish (74.0–86.5cm) overlapped with the upper range of age 3 Chinook with the largest age 3 fish measuring 86.0 cm FL. Age was not determined for unclipped Chinook captured in the spawning building. Stream surveys Four surveys were completed in 2019; two were total surveys of all reaches, and two were partial surveys. The first partial survey was conducted mid-September focusing on the North Fork, South Fork, and upper most main stem reach; Reaches 5 and 6, which are located farther downstream than sampled reaches, were omitted due to high turbidity and a historic lack of Chinook adults utilizing these reaches as holding habitat during this time period. The next two surveys were complete surveys of our study area occurring in October. The final survey took place in early November and focused on the North Fork and upper-main stem reach where our observations of adults and redds occurred. Environmental conditions during the snorkel surveys were acceptable for making observations. The average river flow during the four spawning surveys was approximately 55 cfs on the North Fork (Figure 10) and 68 cfs on the South Fork (Figure 11). Creek flows were always above 111 cfs on the main stem (Reaches 4–6; Figure 12). Water temperatures during our surveys ranged from 45.4ºF to 63.8ºF. The average turbidity was 2.27 NTU with a range of 1.22 to 3.51 NTU. During our snorkel surveys we encountered four Chinook carcasses (Table 11) and 30 redds. All carcasses collected were from the North Fork. Four redds were observed during our initial survey; three of those were found in the North Fork and one in the upper main stem near the confluence of the forks. During the second and third surveys, a combined total of 17 Redds were observed in the lower portion of the North Fork, six redds were found in the South Fork, and two were located in the upper main stem near the confluence of the forks. During the final survey in November, a single redd was observed in the South Fork. Sixteen live adult Chinook were observed by snorkelers during our study period: seven were seen in each the first and

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 13 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

second survey, and an additional two were observed during the third survey. The majority of these observations were made in the upper main stem and both forks; however, one Chinook adult was observed in the lower portion of the main stem nearer to CNFH (Table 12). Holding temperatures — Using the modified Ward and Keir’s suitability categories we summarized the temperatures for the spring Chinook holding period at select monitoring sites on Battle Creek (Table 13). Maintenance issues with loggers occurred at three locations resulting in loss of 9.5% of all data points collected. These outages both occurred at the start of the holding period in the months of June and July. Loggers with data loss were in locations that were between upstream and downstream temperature monitoring locations with consistently recorded data. Based on trends in our monitoring data during the holding period of previous years, temperatures typically increase longitudinally downstream; therefore, it is a safe assumption that MDT for a location between an upstream and downstream monitoring location will have an MDT within the range of the relative upstream and downstream monitoring station’s temperatures. Based on this assumption, all 128 days of lost data fell within either the good or fair category (< 66.2°F) during the holding period; therefore, temperatures were categorized as good or fair for holding 99.9% of the holding period of June through September. MDT on the North Fork was classified as fair 33.6% of days during the spawning period, whereas the South Fork was fair 65.3%, with all remaining percentages in the good category. Most days that fell into the fair category were recorded during the months of July and August, when air temperatures are seasonally at their warmest for our study area. Temperatures at main stem monitoring stations fell into the good, fair, and poor categories 38.0%, 61.9%, and 0.1% of the time, respectively. On a single day, July 29, at the furthest downstream temperature monitoring station in the holding area of the main stem, MDT (66.23°F) was just above the criterion to be classified as poor. Spawning location and timing — Thirty redds were encountered during our four surveys. Twenty-seven percent of all redds found during surveys were observed above the old Wildcat Dam site in Reach 1 (Figure 13). All of the redds were age-2 when first encountered, implying that they had characteristics indicating recent construction prior to observation. With 30 spring Chinook redds counted above the barrier weir, it would suggest a maximum spawning population of 60 Chinook, which is greater than the observed spring Chinook escapement of 45 observed during spawning building operations and video monitoring. Onset and peak spawning appeared to be similar to previous years, which is from mid-September to mid-October. There was consistent measurement of temperature data at all sites during the incubation period with no outages. Redds found in these three zones were predominately exposed to water temperatures in the excellent and good ranges with few days that MDT fell within the fair or poor categories (Table 14). Spring Chinook population trend analysis A simple linear regression was used to evaluate the spring Chinook population trend from 1995 to 2019. The slope of the regression line was 6.79 indicating that the population increased by approximately 7 (± 10.18 CI) Chinook per year on average (Figure 14). There was no strong evidence that there was a difference (P = 0.0764) between the population trend and zero. Data diagnostics gave some indication that population estimates were auto correlated (i.e., 2-year-lag negative autocorrelation) and had increasing variance over time.

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 14 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

Discussion

Battle Creek adult monitoring This year marks the first observed return of Jumpstart winter Chinook to Battle Creek. Our monitoring operations were altered significantly in 2019 compared to previous years due to the anticipated arrival of these fish. In previous years, spawning building operations typically transitioned to video monitoring in early-April near the end of the migration period of HOR late- fall Chinook. The planned timing of this action was to ensure that as few as possible HOR Chinook Salmon were able to utilize the river ladder to access upper Battle Creek while also allowing NOR spring Chinook returning during this period to volitionally pass upstream. However, during 2019 the coinciding migration periods of NOR spring Chinook and newly returning HOR Jumpstart winter Chinook necessitated the continuation of our hand-processing fish into summer. The was to allow us to intercept the winter Chinook to collect tissue samples and to capture fish that would later be transferred LSNFH. When water temperatures began to exceed acceptable levels (68°F) in CNFH holding ponds, the fish ladder was modified to allow upstream passage through the river ladder, which allowed some HOR Jumpstart winter Chinook to pass CNFH barrier weir. A consequence of extending our spawning building operations was that fishes of the Foothill Species Assemblage, such as Suckers, were potentially delayed in their upstream passage during their spawning migration period, which has typically been observed to occur in April of previous years (Bottaro and Earley 2020). Although these fish had access to the hatchery ladder during our spawning building operations, the water velocities and structural configuration of the hatchery ladder creates conditions that inhibit upstream passage in to the hatchery ponds. This hypothesis is derived from the low numbers of these fishes that are observed during our spawning building operations. To address this issue during our 2019 monitoring, we planned two “Foothill Liberation” periods timed to coincide with the peak migration period of this assemblage during which the fish ladder was reconfigured for a short duration to allow upstream passage. During the first Foothill Liberation, we observed large groups of Suckers moving upstream once the river ladder was opened while only two HOR (Jumpstart winter Chinook) fish were observed passing upstream. Since fishes of the foothill assemblage were observed moving upstream in high density while only four HOR fish were observed passing upstream of the CNFH barrier weir, we assess these actions as successful and plan to continue similar actions in the future. Potential alterations and improvements to the fish ladder, including an automated sorting facility, could also be effectively used to address delayed upstream passage of fishes; these modifications are being investigated to assess their potential benefits and logistical feasibility. Severe drought conditions in our study area from 2012–2016 have had significant, lasting effects on fish populations in Battle Creek. Water temperatures during the incubation period of 2016 were higher than optimal ranges leading to an anticipated lower than average return of age- 3 fish in 2019, which based upon our monitoring appears to be true (Bottaro and Earley 2018). In recent years including 2019, lower than average spring Chinook adult fish and redd counts have been recorded although water temperatures during 2019 were in more suitable ranges for pre- spawn holding and spawning based on established criteria. We are hopeful that temperature associated mortality of 2019 juvenile Chinook Salmon is low and will potentially lead to higher adult and redd counts when this cohort returns in upcoming years.

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 15 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

Jumpstart winter Chinook — The return of ninety-five Jumpstart winter Chinook to Battle Creek in 2019 was an encouraging milestone in the effort to reintroduce this population to the watershed. All fish of this group collected and observed in 2019 were categorized as grilse- sized males. Seventy-four of these fish were routed to LSNFH for inclusion in their broodstock for Jumpstart winter Chinook; however, 21 passed upstream into Battle Creek along with other NOR Chinook Salmon that were permitted upstream. Based on observations during spawning surveys in the fall, we do not believe that interbreeding between Jumpstart winter Chinook and NOR spring run occurred based on the lack of in situ observations of live Jumpstart winter Chinook, although this cannot be stated definitively. We adapted our spawning building operations to address logistical challenges with transporting these fish to LSNFH, which included utilizing CNFH holding tanks and tanker trucks to transport these fish. Lessons were learned and improvements in equipment and handling procedures have been proposed for inclusion in future protocols such that handling- caused effects on these fish are minimized. Moving forward we plan to use a portion of these fish to amend broodstock at LSNFH while allowing others access to upper Battle Creek in order to hopefully establish a naturally breeding population (USFWS 2020). Undoubtedly this will continue to be logistically challenging as we expect potentially more numerous returns composed of overlapping annual cohorts in upcoming years. Foothill Species Assemblage Liberations— The river ladder was opened for two brief periods scheduled to coincide with the upstream migration of other native fishes, primarily Suckers, which have been observed via video monitoring during March and April in previous years. This was done in response to the observed delay in upstream migration of Suckers in late- March of previous years with most suckers passing upstream in large numbers immediately after the river ladder was opened in April (Bottaro and Earley 2020). The extension of spawning building operations, during which upstream passage via the river ladder is physically prohibited, to overlap this migration period was needed to process and remove Jumpstart winter Chinook. Shortly after the ladder was reconfigured to allow upstream passage during the first Foothill Liberation period on April 16, over 3,000 Suckers passed upstream in large groups. This initial group was nearly 10 times more numerous than Suckers processed or observed throughout the remainder of the season; only 16 Suckers passed upstream during the second Foothill Liberation. The perceived success of these actions highlights that our current operations do delay upstream passage of the foothill assemblage, that temporary reconfigurations of the ladder to allow upstream passage of these fish can be effective, and that this practice should be continued until such time that automated fish sorting can be used to allow these fishes to pass upstream while concurrently prohibiting passage of non-native or HOR fishes. Reduced spring Chinook and redd counts — The number of redds observed in 2019 (n = 30) was similar to 2018 (n = 29), but was below the average number of redds observed annually since 1995 (x̅ = 84). Water temperatures recorded in areas where redds were located were nearly completely classified as good or excellent (≤ 58°F) during the incubation period. This suggests that the juvenile mortality rate resulting from temperature stress during incubation was relatively low (< 8%; Table 9). Spring Chinook escapement (n = 46) was less than a quarter of the 25-year average escapement estimates (x̅ = 190). During the 2016 season we believe the severe drought and higher than average water temperatures during the holding and spawning period, with documented temperatures reaching upwards of 70 °F in the upper watershed, led to a decrease in successful spawning and emergence (Bottaro and Earley 2018). We anticipated that there would be a lower than average return of age-3 fish in 2019, which appeared to be true.

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 16 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

Hatchery Influence— For the past 11 years we have observed clipped hatchery fish passing through our video monitoring system. The proportion of HOR fish making up our spawning population has varied over the years and has ranged from 4% in 2009 to 29% in 2010 (Bottaro and Brown 2014). On June 13, an adipose clipped Chinook assumed to be a spring Chinook of FRFH origin was mistakenly passed upstream accounting for 2.2% of 2019 spring Chinook escapement. Due to this error, no CWT was collected and associated info regarding the run designation and hatchery-of-origin for this fish is unknown. Twenty-one Jumpstart winter Chinook males were observed passing during video monitoring in late-July after spawning building operations had ceased. No other HOR Chinook were passed upstream during spawning building operations nor were any observed passing upstream during our video monitoring. Although we observed two potential FRFH spring run returning to Battle Creek, the number of HOR returns has greatly reduced since California Department of Water Resources halted trucking of these fish beginning with broodyear 2014 (CDFW 2014).

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 17 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

Acknowledgements

Funding for this monitoring project was provided by the Bureau of Reclamation, the CALFED Ecosystem Restoration Program, and the Iron Mountain Mine Trustee Council. We would like to thank the Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office staff who worked on this project: Greg Aull, Gina Beer, Bret Fessenden, Amy Gondran, Jennifer Graves, Jacie Knight, John Lang, Stephanie Serritello, Ryan Schaefer, and Mike Schraml. We thank Jim Smith and Matt Brown for their support to our office and the program. We thank the Coleman National Fish Hatchery staff, especially Ron Stone, Bob Null, and Brett Galyean, for assisting with barrier weir activities and accommodating our project at the hatchery. We thank the Pacific Gas and Electric staff for their cooperation. We would like to thank California Department of Fish and Wildlife for their assistance with barrier evaluations and weir installations. We are grateful to the landowners within the Battle Creek watershed, without whose access and cooperation this monitoring could not be completed.

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 18 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

References

Alston, N. O., J. M. Newton, and M. R. Brown. 2007. Monitoring adult Chinook salmon, rainbow trout, and steelhead in Battle Creek, California, from November 2003 through November 2004. USFWS Report. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office, Red Bluff, California. Bottaro, R. J. and L. A. Earley. 2020. Monitoring adult Chinook Salmon, Rainbow Trout, and Steelhead in Battle Creek, California, from March through November 2018. USFWS Report. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office, Red Bluff, California.

Bottaro, R. J. and L. A. Earley. 2018. Monitoring adult Chinook Salmon, Rainbow Trout, and Steelhead in Battle Creek, California, from March through November 2016. USFWS Report. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office, Red Bluff, California. Bottaro, R. J., L. A. Earley, and M. R. Brown. 2014. Monitoring adult Chinook Salmon, Rainbow Trout, and Steelhead in Battle Creek, California, from March through November 2013. USFWS Report. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office, Red Bluff, California. Brown, M. R., and J. M. Newton. 2002. Monitoring adult Chinook salmon, rainbow trout, and steelhead in Battle Creek, California, from March through October 2001. USFWS Report. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office, Red Bluff, California. CDFW (California Department of Fish and Wildlife). 2014. Contingency Release Strategies for Juvenile, Feather River Hatchery Spring-Run Chinook Salmon due to Severe Drought. Memo. March. Sacramento, CA. Earley, L. A. 2016. Summary of Pilot Assessment of Three Potential Fish Barriers on Battle Creek. USFWS Report. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office, Red Bluff, California. Giovannetti, S. L., and M. R. Brown. 2008. Adult spring Chinook salmon monitoring in Clear Creek, California: 2007 annual report. USFWS Report. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office, Red Bluff, California. ICF International. 2016. Battle Creek Winter-Run Chinook Salmon Reintroduction Plan. Prepared for the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Sacramento, California. Newton, J. M. and M. R. Brown. 2003. Middle Battle Creek reconnaissance survey, 2001. USFWS Report. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office, Red Bluff, California. NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service). 2002. Biological Opinion for the Central Valley Project (CVP) and State Water Project (SWP) operations, April 1, 2002 through March 31, 2004. National Marine Fisheries Service, Southwest Region. NMFS. 2009. Biological Opinion for the Central Valley Project (CVP) and State Water Project (SWP) operations, June 4, 2009. National Marine Fisheries Service, Southwest Region.

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 19 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

Terraqua, Inc. 2004. Battle Creek Salmon and Steelhead Restoration Project adaptive management plan. Draft. April. Prepared for the U.S. Department of Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, Pacific Gas and Electric Company, National Marine Fisheries Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and California Department of Fish and Game. Wauconda, WA. Tehama Environmental Solutions, Inc. 2020. North Fork Battle Creek Barrier Modification and Fish Passage Improvement Project, Final Environment Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact. Prepared for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Sacramento, CA. TRPA (Thomas R. Payne and Associates). 1991. Draft Anadromous Fish Migration Barrier Survey of Battle Creek, Shasta and Tehama Counties. Report by TRPA to California Department of Fish and Game. TRPA. 1998. A 1989 survey of barriers to the upstream migration of anadromous salmonids: 1 of 8 components. Report by TRPA to California Department of Fish and Game. USBR (United States Bureau of Reclamation). 2020. Battle Creek Salmon and Steelhead Restoration Project. http://www.usbr.gov/mp/battlecreek/. USFWS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). 2001. Final Restoration Plan for the Anadromous Fish Restoration Program. Prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service under the direction of the Anadromous Fish Restoration Program Core Group. Stockton, CA. USFWS. 2017. Assessment and Recommendations for Using the Progeny of Captive Broodstock to Benefit the Conservation of Sacramento River Winter-run Chinook Salmon. Prepared for California Fish and Wildlife and National Marine Fisheries Service. Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office. Red Bluff, CA. USFWS. 2018. Summary of Actions to Jumpstart the Reintroduction of Sacramento River Winter-run Chinook Salmon to Battle Creek, 2017-2018. Annual Report. Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office. Red Bluff, CA. USFWS. 2020. Reintroduction of Winter-Run Chinook Salmon to Battle Creek: A plan to manage the Transition from the Jumpstart Project to the Winter-run Chinook Salmon Reintroduction Plan. USFWS Report. Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office, Red Bluff, CA. Ward, M. B., and W. M. Kier. 1999. Battle Creek salmon and steelhead restoration plan. Report by Kier Associates to Battle Creek Working Group.

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 20 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

Tables

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 21 U.S Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

Table 1. Multiannual summary of total adult late-fall run Chinook Salmon and Rainbow Trout/steelhead released upstream of Coleman National Fish Hatchery (CNFH) barrier weir during the CNFH broodstock collection and spawning program, 1994–2019. Late-fall run Chinook Salmon are generally passed from late December through February and Rainbow Trout/steelhead from October through February. Late-fall Chinook Salmon a Rainbow Trout/steelhead Year Clipped Unclipped Clipped Unclipped 1994-1995 0 0 0 1995-1996 0 0 276 b 1996-1997 0 0 295 b 1997-1998 0 0 418 b 1998-1999 0 0 1163 b 1999-2000 0 0 1416 b 2000-2001 0 98 1352 131 2001-2002 0 216 1428 410 2002-2003 0 57 769 416 2003-2004 0 40 314 179 2004-2005 0 23 0 270 2005-2006 0 50 0 249 2006-2007 0 72 0 132 2007-2008 0 19 0 156 2008-2009 0 32 0 196 2009-2010 0 27 0 265 2010-2011 0 14 0 199 2011-2012 0 14 0 198 2012-2013 0 38 0 281 2013-2014 0 106 0 335 2014-2015 0 96 0 356 2015-2016 0 34 0 328 2016-2017 0 20 0 232 2017-2018 0 18 0 145 2018-2019 0 66 0 128 a All juvenile late-fall run Chinook Salmon produced at CNFH were adipose-fin clipped beginning in 1992. b All juvenile Rainbow Trout/steelhead produced at CNFH were adipose-fin clipped beginning in 1998; therefore, differentiation between natural and hatchery adults based on mark status was not entirely possible until the 2001–2002 return year.

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 22 U.S Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

Table 2. Multiannual summary of estimated escapement in Battle Creek of clipped and unclipped Chinook Salmon and Rainbow Trout/steelhead passing upstream through the Coleman National Fish Hatchery (CNFH) barrier weir fish ladder between March and August, 1995–2019. Ladder open Chinook Salmon Rainbow Trout/steelhead Year (m/dd) Clipped a Unclipped Clipped Unclipped 1995 3/30–6/30 74 66 34 b 127 b 1996 3/26–7/01 151 35 1 b 40 b 1997 3/05–7/01 130 107 0 b 49 b 1998 3/04–7/01 40 178 0 b 51 b 1999 3/09–7/01 3 73 6 b 100 b 2000 3/07–9/01 7 78 18 b 86 b 2001 3/03–8/31 5 111 30 94 2002 3/01–8/30 0 222 14 183 2003 3/03–8/29 13 221 3 118 2004 3/02–8/01 2 90 15 125 2005 3/01–8/01 0 73 0 74 2006 3/01–8/01 0 221 1 189 2007 3/01–8/01 5 291 3 216 2008 3/01–8/01 5 105 1 120 2009 3/01–8/01 9 194 20 135 2010 3/01–8/01 50 124 18 127 2011 3/01–8/01 41 140 78 52 2012 3/01–8/01 152 652 -16 170 2013 3/01–8/01 35 581 76 325 2014 3/01–8/01 42 393 33 151 2015 3/13–8/01 35 163 30 61 2016 3/10–8/01 32 172 107 88 2017 3/01–8/01 23 30 152 105 2018 3/01–8/03 10 73 54 14 2019 3/04–8/01 22 45 1 93 a A comprehensive (100%) marking program for juvenile late-fall run Chinook Salmon produced at CNFH began in 1992. This number includes possible clipped late-fall, spring and winter-run Chinook Salmon. b A comprehensive (100%) marking program for juvenile steelhead produced at CNFH began in 1998; therefore, differentiation between natural and hatchery adults based on mark status was not entirely possible until the 2001–2002 return year

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 23 U.S Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

Table 3. Multiannual summary of total estimated escapement in Battle Creek of all four runs of Chinook Salmon, and Rainbow Trout/steelhead passing upstream of Coleman National Fish Hatchery (CNFH) barrier weir, 1995–2019. Total estimated escapement fish passed during broodstock collection and our monitoring (January-July). Maximum potential spring-run Chinook Salmon includes all unclipped and clipped salmon passed during the ladder operation period. Estimated spring-run Chinook Salmon escapement is a reduced estimate based on apportioning some Chinook Salmon to the winter, fall, and late-fall runs.

Winter- Late-fall Fall-run run Spring-run Chinook run Rainbow Trout/ Year Chinook Chinook Salmon Chinook steelhead Salmon Salmon Salmon Maximum Estimated Clipped Unclipped 1995 66 161a 1996 35 317a 1997 107 344a 1998 178 469a 1999 73 1269a 2000 78 1520a 2001 0+ 111 100 9 to 14 98 to 102b 1382 225 2002 3 222 144 42 249b 1442 593 2003 0 221 100 130 61b 772 534 2004 0 90 70 20 42b 329 304 2005 0 73 67 6 23b 0 344 2006 1 221 154 66 50b 1 438 2007 0 291 0 72b 3 348 2008 0 105 0 19b 1 276 2009 0 194 0 33b 20 331 2010 0 174c 0 27b 18 392 2011 1 159 c 0 14b 78 251 2012 0 799c 0 14b -16 368 2013 1 608c 1 41b 76 606 2014 0 429c 0 110b 33 486 2015 0 181c 0 103b 30 417 2016 1 180c 0 57b 107 416 2017 0 30c 0 43 152 337 2018 1 82c 0 18 54 159 2019 96d 47e 0 66 1 221 a Clip status was not used to differentiate hatchery and natural-origin adult Rainbow Trout/steelhead until 2001 because CNFH did not begin marking all of their production until brood year 1998. b Genetic samples have not been analyzed to determine the total estimate of late-fall run Chinook Salmon. This number includes unclipped and clipped late-fall run Chinook Salmon passing above the CNFH barrier weir. c Includes all unclipped spring-run Chinook Salmon passed during ladder and video operation as well as possible clipped Feather River spring-run Chinook Salmon passed during video operation. d All winter-run Chinook Salmon were clipped: 21 were Jumpstart winter-run Chinook Salmon that passed upstream of CNFH barrier weir, 74 were Jumpstart winter-run Chinook Salmon that were collected and routed to Livingston Stone National Fish Hatchery (LSNFH), and one was a LSNFH-origin fish that was captured at CNFH and released into the Sacramento River. e Includes all unclipped spring-run Chinook Salmon passed during ladder and video operation; an adipose-clipped chinook visually identified as a spring-run Chinook Salmon that was accidentally passed upstream; and an adipose-clipped chinook visually identified as spring-run Chinook Salmon whose associated CWT was lost.

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 24 U.S Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

Table 4. Multiannual summary of total Chinook Salmon redds (n) observed between August and November, and their distribution among the North Fork, South Fork, and main stem Battle Creeks, 1995–2019. All observations were made during spring-run Chinook Salmon snorkel surveys.

Year n North Fork South Fork Main stem 1995 a, b 13 46% 54% 0% 1996 a, c 21 52% 0% 48% 1997 a 66 53% 15% 32% 1998 247 33% 34% 33% 1999 a, d - - - - 2000 - - - - 2001 33 33% 39% 27% 2002 78 35% 21% 45% 2003 a 173 45% 15% 40% 2004 35 48% 8% 44% 2005 47 51% 13% 36% 2006 122 61% 19% 20% 2007 132 61% 14% 25% 2008 40 27% 25% 48% 2009 88 64% 10% 26% 2010 93 48% 28% 24% 2011 66 82% 5% 14% 2012 320 68% 13% 19% 2013 119 70% 6% 24% 2014 99 24% 44% 32% 2015 28 89% 0% 11% 2016 51 78% 2% 20% 2017 5 60% 0% 40% 2018 29 93% 0% 7% 2019 30 63% 23% 13% a Some redds were observed prior to August in 1995, 1996, 1997, and 2003 and are not included in this table. b In 1995, surveys were not conducted after the last week of September. c In 1996, surveys were not conducted in Reach 6 after August. d In 1999, only one survey was conducted in reaches 1-3 in September.

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 25 U.S Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

Table 5. Multiannual summary from 1995–2019 of Chinook Salmon redd density (redds per mile) in Battle Creek observed during snorkel surveys. Columns below include the year, cumulative redd density in the North Fork, South Fork, and main stem as well as redds per mile in each specific survey reach.

North Fork South Fork Main stem Year (Reaches 1-2) (Reach 3) (Reaches 4-6) Reach 1 Reach 2 Reach 3 Reach 4 Reach 5 Reach 6 1995 a ------1996 2 0 1 0 4 0 2 0 1 1997 7 4 2 5 8 4 4 1 1 1998 15 33 8 12 19 33 13 4 6 1999 a ------2000 a ------2001 2 5 1 1 3 5 1 1 1 2002 5 6 3 3 8 6 4 4 2 2003 15 10 7 5 26 10 12 3 5 2004 5 1 1 0 10 1 2 0 0 2005 5 2 2 0 10 2 3 2 <1 2006 14 9 2 7 22 9 6 <1 <1 2007 15 8 3 2 29 8 7 2 0 2008 2 4 2 1 3 4 4 <1 <1 2009 11 4 2 4 18 4 4 <1 <1 2010 9 10 2 4 14 10 3 1 1 2011 10 1 <1 8 13 1 1 1 0 2012 42 16 6 46 37 16 10 4 2 2013 16 3 3 16 16 3 6 2 0 2014 5 17 3 2 8 17 6 2 <1 2015 5 0 <1 3 7 0 1 0 0 2016 15 <1 3 8 7 <1 2 0 1 2017 3 0 2 1 0 0 <1 0 0 2018 27 0 2 4 5 0 <1 0 0 2019 19 7 4 3 4 3 1 0 0 a Survey frequency was inadequate to obtain a total count of redds.

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 26 U.S Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

Table 6. Multiannual summary of total days spent processing/enumerating fish at the barrier weir trap, in Coleman National Fish Hatchery’s spawning building, and video monitoring from 1998– 2019.

Year Barrier weir Spawning Video Total trapping building a monitoring 1998 89 0 30 119 1999 78 0 36 114 2000 75 0 102 177 2001b 66 0 115 181 200 2b 87 0 96 183 2003b 88 0 91 179 2004 91 0 61 152 2005 86 0 67 153 2006 107 0 46 153 2007 69 0 84 153 2008 77 0 76 153 Mean prior barrier weir 83 0 73 156 construction 2009 64 10 78 152 2010 78 6 67 151 2011 0 16 125 141 2012 15 12 125 152 2013 0 21 126 147 2014 0 21 124 145 2015 0 14 125 139 2016 0 16 124 140 2017 0 17 124 141 2018 0 26 125 151 2019 c 0 120 17 137 Mean post barrier weir 14 25 105 146 construction a Fish were not enumerated at the Spawning building prior to 2009. b Monitoring occurred through August 31. c Increased duration of CNFH spawning building monitoring for processing returning Jumpstart winter-run Chinook adults.

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 27 U.S Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

Table 7. Chinook Salmon captured or video-recorded passing the Coleman National Fish Hatchery barrier weir and associated passage estimates for 2019, including data extrapolated during hours not video recorded or during periods of poor quality recordings. Week 7 and Week 9 are divided to show data from the period where upstream passage was permitted and monitored by video alone. Week 20 is divided to show passage data of both monitoring methods separately during the week of transition between the two. Hours Hours of Actual Actual Actual Passage Passage Monitoring Dates Weeks of taped number number number estimate: estimate: Method passage passage clipped unclipped unknown clipped unclipped March 4-9 1 Spawning building 144 144 26 0 0 0 0 March 10-16 2 Spawning building 168 168 16 0 0 0 0 March 17-23 3 Spawning building 168 168 18 0 0 0 0 March 24-30 4 Spawning building 168 168 12 2 0 0 2 March 31- April 6 5 Spawning building 168 168 4 0 0 0 0 April 7-13 6 Spawning building 168 168 3 1 0 0 1 April 14-16 & 17-20 7A Spawning building 157 157 2 0 0 0 0 April 16-17 7B Video 11 11 0 0 0 0 0 April 21-27 8 Spawning building 168 168 1 0 0 0 0 April 28-30 & May 1-4 9A Spawning building 156 156 1 1 0 0 1 April 30-May 1 9B Video 12 12 2 4 0 2 4 May 5-11 10 Spawning building 168 168 8 0 0 0 0 May 12-18 11 Spawning building 144 144 7 3 0 0 3 May 19-25 12 Spawning building 48 48 2 2 0 0 2 May 26-June 1 13 Spawning building 168 168 32 9 0 0 9 June 2-8 14 Spawning building 168 168 10 7 0 0 7 June 9-15 15 Spawning building 168 168 6 3 0 1 3 June 16-22 16 Spawning building 168 168 3 4 0 0 4 June 23-29 17 Spawning building 168 168 2 1 0 0 1 June 30- July 6 18 Spawning building 168 168 0 1 0 0 1 July 7-13 19 Spawning building 168 168 7 1 0 0 1 July 14-18 20A Spawning building 78 78 2 4 0 0 3 July 18-20 20B Video 60 60 7 2 0 7 2 July 21-27 21 Video 168 168 8 1 0 8 1 July 28-August 1 22 Video 103 103 4 0 0 4 0 Totals 3433 3433 183 46 0 22 45

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 28 U.S Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

Table 8. Rainbow trout/steelhead captured or video-recorded passing the Coleman National Fish Hatchery barrier weir and associated passage estimates for 2019, including data extrapolated during hours not video recorded or during periods of poor quality recordings. Week 7 and Week 9 are divided to show data from the period where upstream passage was permitted and monitored by video alone. Week 20 is divided to show passage data of both monitoring methods separately during the week of transition between the two. Hours Hours of Actual Actual Actual Passage Passage Monitoring Dates Weeks of taped number number number estimate: estimate: Method passage passage clipped unclipped unknown clipped unclipped March 4-9 1 Spawning building 144 144 12 8 0 0 8 March 10-16 2 Spawning building 168 168 17 5 0 0 5 March 17-23 3 Spawning building 168 168 2 11 0 0 11 March 24-30 4 Spawning building 168 168 4 6 0 0 6 March 31- April 6 5 Spawning building 168 168 2 16 0 0 16 April 7-13 6 Spawning building 168 168 0 3 0 0 3 April 14-16 & 17-20 7A Spawning building 157 157 1 1 0 0 1 April 16-17 7B Video 11 11 0 0 0 0 0 April 21-27 8 Spawning building 168 168 6 5 0 0 5 April 28-30 & May 1-4 9A Spawning building 156 156 0 5 0 0 5 April 30-May 1 9B Video 12 12 -1 8 0 -1 8 May 5-11 10 Spawning building 168 168 0 4 0 0 4 May 12-18 11 Spawning building 144 144 1 6 0 0 6 May 19-25 12 Spawning building 48 48 3 0 0 0 0 May 26-June 1 13 Spawning building 168 168 2 1 0 0 1 June 2-8 14 Spawning building 168 168 0 2 0 0 2 June 9-15 15 Spawning building 168 168 0 1 0 0 1 June 16-22 16 Spawning building 168 168 0 1 0 0 1 June 23-29 17 Spawning building 168 168 0 1 0 0 1 June 30- July 6 18 Spawning building 168 168 0 6 0 0 6 July 7-13 19 Spawning building 168 168 0 1 0 0 1 July 14-18 20A Spawning building 78 78 1 1 0 0 1 July 18-20 20B Video 60 60 -1 3 0 -1 3 July 21-27 21 Video 168 168 3 0 0 3 0 July 28-August 1 22 Video 103 103 0 -2 0 0 -2 Totals 3433 3433 52 93 0 1 93

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 29 U.S Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

Table 9. Temperature criteria used to evaluate the suitability of Battle Creek water temperatures for spring-run Chinook Salmon. Criteria are modified from Ward and Kier (1999). Mean daily water Life stage temperature (°F) Response Suitability category Adult holding ≤60.8 Optimum Good >60.8 to 66.2 Some mortality and infertility Fair >66.2 No successful spawning Poor ≥80 Lethal Very poor Egg incubation ≤56 Optimum Excellent >56 to ≤58 <8% mortality Good >58 to ≤60 15 to 25% mortality Fair >60 to ≤62 50 to 80% mortality Poor >62 100% mortality Very poor

Table 10. Number of redds by reach and estimated range for percent of days that incubating spring Chinook Salmon eggs fell within each water temperature suitability categories in Battle Creek in 2019. The left and right percentages of each range (with numbers in parentheses) represent the average for the worst-case scenario and the average for the best-case scenario, respectively.

Reach Location n (Redds) Very poor Poor Fair Good Excellent 1 North Fork 8 0% 0% 0.6–2.5% (1–2d) 1.5–7.8% (2–7d) 89.7–97.9% (85–99d) 2 North Fork 11 0% 0.0–0.3% (0d) 0.0–2.6% (0–3d) 0.0–4.1% (0–4d) 93.0–100% (91–105d) 3 South Fork 7 0% 0.0–0.3% (0d) 0.0–1.8% (0–2d) 0.0–4.2% (0–4d) 93.7–100% (98–115d) 4 Main stem 4 0% 0.5–1.5% (1-2d) 0.5–3.8% (1–4d) 0.2–2.0% (0–2d) 92.7–98.8% (92–106d) 5 Main stem 0 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 6 Main stem 0 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Total 30 0% 0.1–0.4% 0.2–2.5% 0.4–4.8% 92.3–99.3%

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 30 U.S Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

Table 11. Chinook Salmon number of live adults, redds, and carcasses observed during the 2019 Battle Creek stream surveys, by reach. Reach Date Live Chinook Redd count Carcass count 1 9/17 5 3 0 1 9/30 0 4 1 1 10/15 0 1 0 1 11/8 0 0 0 2 9/18 1 0 1 2 10/1 1 9 2 2 10/16 1 2 0 2 11/7 0 0 0 3 9/16 0 0 0 3 10/2 3 5 0 3 10/17 0 1 0 3 11/5 0 1 0 4 9/23 3 1 0 4 10/3 1 2 0 4 10/17 0 1 0 4 11/6 0 0 0 5 10/4 0 0 0 5 10/18 0 0 0 6 10/4 0 0 0 6 10/18 1 0 0 TOTAL 16 30 4

Table 12. Total biweekly counts of live Chinook Salmon adults observed on 2019 Battle Creek stream surveys, by reach. Reach Survey 1 Survey 2 Survey 3 Survey 4 1 5 0 0 0 2 1 1 1 0 3 0 3 0 0 4 3 1 0 0 5 -- 0 0 -- 6 -- 0 1 -- Totals 9 5 2 0

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 31 U.S Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

Table 13. Number of days mean daily temperatures met Ward and Kier's (1999) suitability categories for spring-run Chinook Salmon holding from June 1 through September 30, 2019 at select monitoring sites in Battle Creek. River No Very Site name Location mile a data poor Poor Fair Good Eagle Canyon Dam North Fork 5.2b 0 0 0 0 122

Wildcat Dam North Fork 2.5b 55 0 0 20 47

Wildcat Road Bridge North Fork 0.9b 0 0 0 77 45

Above confluence of forks North Fork 0.1b 0 0 0 55 67

Coleman Diversion Dam South Fork 2.5b 0 0 0 70 52

Manton Road Bridge South Fork 1.7b 48 0 0 44 30

Above confluence of forks South Fork 0.1b 0 0 0 87 35

Below confluence of forks Main stem 16.1c 0 0 0 67 55

Below Baldwin Creek Main stem 15.9c 25 0 0 59 38

Reach 4 lower Main stem 12.9c 0 0 0 78 44

Reach 5 lower Main stem 9.5c 0 0 1 95 26

Total 128 0 1 652 561 a River miles were recalculated with updated creek line in ArcGIS b From confluence of the North Fork and South Fork Battle Creek c From confluence with the Sacramento River

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 32 U.S Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

Table 14. Number of days mean daily temperatures met Ward and Kier's (1999) suitability categories for spring-run Chinook Salmon egg incubation from September 15 through October 31, 2019 at select monitoring sites in Battle Creek. River No Very Poor Fair Good Site name Location milea data poor Excellent

Eagle Canyon Dam North Fork 5.2b 0 0 0 0 4 43 Wildcat Dam North Fork 2.5b 0 0 0 2 8 37 Wildcat Road Bridge North Fork 0.9b 0 0 0 2 8 37 Above confluence of North Fork 0.1b 0 0 1 5 8 33 forks Coleman Diversion South Fork 2.5b 0 0 0 2 7 38 Dam Manton Road Bridge South Fork 1.7b 0 0 0 4 7 36 Above confluence of South Fork 0.1b 0 0 2 4 7 34 forks Below confluence of Main stem 16.1c 0 0 2 6 6 33 forks Below Baldwin Main stem 15.9c 0 0 1 5 8 33 Reach 4 lower Main stem 12.9c 0 0 4 8 2 33 Reach 5 lower Main stem 9.5c 0 2 5 7 2 31

d Reach 6 lower Main stem 6.2c 0 2 6 6 2 31

Total 0 4 21 51 69 419 a River miles were recalculated with updated creek line in ArcGIS b From confluence of the North Fork and South Fork Battle Creek c From confluence with the Sacramento River d This logger is deployed at our rotary screw trap location above the CNFH barrier weir

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 33 U.S Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

Figures

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 34 U.S Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

Figure 1. Map of the Sacramento River and its tributaries (including Battle Creek) between Keswick Dam and Red Bluff, California.

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 35 U.S Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

(RM 13.17)

Old Wildcat Dam Site (RM 2.48)

(RM 9.42)

(RM 5.25)

(RM 2.54) (RM 22.47) (RM 5.97) (RM 8.02)

(RM 14.39)

Figure 2. Map of Battle Creek depicting the location in river miles (RM) of the Coleman National Fish Hatchery barrier weir, stream survey reaches, the old Wildcat Dam site, and the historical limits to anadromy.

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 36 U.S Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

Figure 3. Aerial photograph of the fish ladder at Coleman National Fish Hatchery. Photograph shows the main stem Battle Creek and parts of the fish ladder including the barrier weir, hatchery ladder, middle ladder, auxiliary ladder, and river ladder.

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 37 U.S Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

Unclipped CHN 0:00 Clipped CHN Sunrise (PDT) 21:00 Sunset (PDT)

18:00

15:00

12:00

9:00 Time (PDT) Time

6:00

3:00

0:00

Date

Figure 4. Diel migration of Chinook Salmon (CHN, unclipped and clipped) observed at the Coleman National Fish Hatchery barrier weir during period of video monitoring (July 16–August 1) in 2019.

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 38 U.S Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

Unclipped RBT 0:00 Clipped RBT Unknown RBT Sunrise (PDT) 21:00 Sunset (PDT)

18:00

15:00

12:00

9:00 Time (PDT) Time

6:00

3:00

0:00

Date

Figure 5. Diel migration of Rainbow Trout/steelhead (RBT, unclipped and clipped) observed at the Coleman National Fish Hatchery barrier weir during period of video monitoring (July 16–August 1) in 2019.

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 39 U.S Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

30 Clipped Upstream passage closed August 1 Unclipped 25 Upstream passage opened July 18 20

15 Spawning facility Video of of Chinook Salmon operations monitoring

Number 10

5

0 July 7 June 2 June 9 May 5 May April 7 April July 21 July 28 July 14 July 18 May 12 May 19 May 26 June 16 June 23 June 30 March 4 April 21 April April 14 April 16 April 28 April 30 April March 10 March 17 March 24 March 31 6 – 19 – 14 – 15 – 10 – 8 – 1 – 21 – 22 – 11 – 12 – 13 – 16 – 17 – 18 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 – 7A – 7B – 9A – 9B – Week – 20A – 20B

Figure 6. Number of clipped and unclipped Chinook Salmon observed at the Coleman National Fish Hatchery barrier weir fish ladder (in spawning facility and by video) in 2019, by week. Dates begin the first Sunday of each week.

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 40 U.S Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

30 Clipped

Unclipped 25 Upstream passage closed August 1

20 Upstream passage opened July 18

15 Video Spawning facility monitoring

of of RBT/steelhead operations only 10 Number

5

0

-5 July 7 June 2 June 9 May 5 May April 7 April July 21 July 28 July 14 July 18 May 12 May 19 May 26 June 16 June 23 June 30 March 4 April 21 April April 14 April 16 April 28 April 30 April March 10 March 17 March 24 March 31 6 – 19 – 14 – 15 – 10 – 8 – 1 – 21 – 22 – 11 – 12 – 13 – 16 – 17 – 18 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 – 7A – 7B – 9A – 9B – Week – 20A – 20B

Figure 7. Number of clipped and unclipped Rainbow Trout/steelhead observed at the Coleman National Fish Hatchery fish ladder (in spawning building and by video) in 2019, by week. Dates begin the Sunday of each week.

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 41 U.S Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

40 WCS 35 LFCS SCS 30

25

20

15

Number of Chinook Salmon Chinook of Number 10

5

0 40–44.5 45–49.5 50–54.5 55–59.5 60–64.5 65–69.5 70–74.5 75–79.5 80–84.5 85–89.5 Fork Length (cm)

Figure 8. Length-frequency distribution of Chinook Salmona classified by run (WCS=winter-run Chinook Salmon, LFCS=late-fall run Chinook Salmon, SCS=spring-run Chinook Salmon) captured in Coleman National Fish Hatchery spawning facility in 2019. a Length data for two fall-run Chinook Salmon (FL = 72.5, 73.0 cm) are intentionally omitted from figure.

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 42 U.S Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

40 Clipped

35 Unclipped

30

25

20

15 O. mykiss O. of Number

10

5

0 25–29.5 30–34.5 35–39.5 40–44.5 45–49.5 50–54.5 55–59.5 60–65.5 Fork Length (cm)

Figure 9. Length–frequency distribution of Rainbow Trout/steelhead captured in Coleman National Fish Hatchery spawning building in 2019.

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 43 U.S Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

5,000 75 NF Flow 2019 4,500 NF Temp 2019 NF Ave Temp 2002-2018 70 4,000

3,500 65 Temperature ( 3,000 60 2,500 Flow (cfs) Flow 55 ° F) 2,000

1,500 50

1,000 45 500

0 40

Date

Figure 10. North Fork (NF) Battle Creek mean daily water temperature and flow for 2019 and average temperature from 2002–2018 at the North Fork Confluence.

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 44 U.S Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

5,000 SF Flow 2019 75 SF Temp 2019 4,500 SF Ave Temp 2003-2018 70 4,000

3,500 65 Temperature ( 3,000 60 2,500 Flow (cfs) Flow 55 ° F) 2,000

1,500 50

1,000 45 500

0 40

Date

Figure 11. South Fork (SF) Battle Creek mean daily water temperature and flow for 2019 and average temperature from 2003–2018 at Manton Road Bridge.

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 45 U.S Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

7,500 75 7,000 CNFH Flow 2019 Confluence Flow 2019 6,500 70 CNFH Temp 2019 6,000 5,500 65 5,000 Temperature ( 4,500 60 4,000 3,500 Flow (cfs) Flow 55 ° F) 3,000 2,500 50 2,000 1,500 1,000 45 500 0 40

Date

Figure 12. Main stem Battle Creek mean daily flow and water temperature at the Coleman National Fish Hatchery (CNFH) barrier weir for 2019. Confluence flow is the sum of North and South fork flow gauging stations.

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 46 U.S Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

70%

60% Percent of redds above Wildcat

50%

40% Percent 30%

20%

10%

0% 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019

Year

Figure 13. Percent of spring Chinook redds located above the old Wildcat Dam site (removed November 2010) on the North Fork of Battle Creek.

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 47 U.S Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

900

800

700

600

500

400 run Chinook Salmon Slope = 6.79 300 R2 = 0.08

200

100

0 Number of potential spring potential- of Number

Year

Figure 14. The annual total number of unclipped spring-run Chinook Salmon (i.e., maximum potential spring Chinook Salmon) passed above the Coleman National Fish Hatchery barrier weir on Battle Creek from 1995 to 2019. The general linear regression line describes the population trend for this period.

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 48 U.S Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

Appendix A. Coded Wire Tag Recovery Efforts

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 49 U.S Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

Table A.1. Coded-wire tags for recovered Chinook Salmon (Chinook) collected during Coleman National Fish Hatchery (CNFH) spawning building (SB) operations 2019.

Hatchery or Collection Method Species Sex FL (cm) Tag code creek Run Brood Year date of origin

3/4/2019 SB Chinook Female 66.0 055868 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/4/2019 SB Chinook Male 70.5 055870 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/4/2019 SB Chinook Female 73.5 055863 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/4/2019 SB Chinook Male 80.0 055867 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/4/2019 SB Chinook Female 72.5 055871 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/4/2019 SB Chinook Female 62.0 055863 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/4/2019 SB Chinook Female 61.5 055869 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/4/2019 SB Chinook Female 72.5 055867 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/5/2019 SB Chinook Female 61.0 055872 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/5/2019 SB Chinook Male 66.0 055871 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/5/2019 SB Chinook Male 74.5 055872 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/5/2019 SB Chinook Female 71.5 055862 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/5/2019 SB Chinook Male 67.0 055869 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/5/2019 SB Chinook Female 75.0 055872 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/6/2019 SB Chinook Female 63.0 055872 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/7/2019 SB Chinook Female 73.5 055872 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/7/2019 SB Chinook Female 68.0 055870 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/7/2019 SB Chinook Female 75.5 055870 CNFH Late-fall 2016

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 50 U.S Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office Table A.1. continued

Hatchery or Collection Method Species Sex FL (cm) Tag code creek Run Brood Year date of origin

3/7/2019 SB Chinook Male 86.0 055866 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/7/2019 SB Chinook Male 82.5 055872 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/7/2019 SB Chinook Male 73.5 055869 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/7/2019 SB Chinook Male 75.5 055870 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/7/2019 SB Chinook Male 72.5 055871 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/5/2019 SB Chinook Male 48.5 055989 CNFH Late-fall 2017 3/7/2019 SB Chinook Female 68.0 055869 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/7/2019 SB Chinook Female 71.5 055869 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/11/2019 SB Chinook Female 80.0 055866 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/11/2019 SB Chinook Male 59.0 055872 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/11/2019 SB Chinook Male 67.5 055869 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/11/2019 SB Chinook Female 66.0 055866 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/12/2019 SB Chinook Female 70.0 055870 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/12/2019 SB Chinook Female 78.0 055869 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/12/2019 SB Chinook Female 59.5 055859 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/13/2019 SB Chinook Male 80.0 055871 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/13/2019 SB Chinook Female 63.0 055870 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/13/2019 SB Chinook Female 64.5 055872 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/13/2019 SB Chinook Female 69.5 055872 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/13/2019 SB Chinook Female 78.0 055871 CNFH Late-fall 2016

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 51 U.S Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office Table A.1. continued

Hatchery or Collection Method Species Sex FL (cm) Tag code creek Run Brood Year date of origin

3/14/2019 SB Chinook Female 69.0 055867 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/14/2019 SB Chinook Female 64.5 055862 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/14/2019 SB Chinook Female 62.0 055867 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/14/2019 SB Chinook Female 73.0 055864 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/15/2019 SB Chinook Male 74.0 055872 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/15/2019 SB Chinook Female 73.0 055872 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/15/2019 SB Chinook Female 65.5 055868 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/15/2019 SB Chinook Female 71.0 055869 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/18/2019 SB Chinook Male 76.0 055870 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/18/2019 SB Chinook Female 82.0 055857 CNFH Late-fall 2015 3/18/2019 SB Chinook Male 79.0 055869 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/18/2019 SB Chinook Male 74.0 055869 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/18/2019 SB Chinook Female 77.0 055870 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/18/2019 SB Chinook Female 74.5 055863 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/18/2019 SB Chinook Male 66.0 055868 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/19/2019 SB Chinook Female 71.0 055871 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/19/2019 SB Chinook Male 82.0 055869 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/19/2019 SB Chinook Female 75.0 055872 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/20/2019 SB Chinook Male 83.5 055868 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/20/2019 SB Chinook Female 74.5 055860 CNFH Late-fall 2016

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 52 U.S Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office Table A.1. continued

Hatchery or Collection Method Species Sex FL (cm) Tag code creek Run Brood Year date of origin

3/20/2019 SB Chinook Male 640 055868 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/20/2019 SB Chinook Female 720 055860 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/22/2019 SB Chinook Female 655 055869 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/25/2019 SB Chinook Male 765 055869 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/25/2019 SB Chinook Female 680 055863 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/25/2019 SB Chinook Female 740 055870 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/25/2019 SB Chinook Male 730 055869 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/26/2019 SB Chinook Female 830 055871 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/26/2019 SB Chinook Female 690 055870 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/26/2019 SB Chinook Female 820 055870 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/27/2019 SB Chinook Female 840 055866 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/27/2019 SB Chinook Female 610 055868 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/27/2019 SB Chinook Female 570 055868 CNFH Late-fall 2016 3/28/2019 SB Chinook Female 665 055872 CNFH Late-fall 2016 4/1/2019 SB Chinook Female 690 055870 CNFH Late-fall 2016 4/1/2019 SB Chinook Female 675 055861 CNFH Late-fall 2016 4/1/2019 SB Chinook Female 740 055871 CNFH Late-fall 2016 4/3/2019 SB Chinook Female 760 055868 CNFH Late-fall 2016 4/10/2019 SB Chinook Female 865 055848 CNFH Late-fall 2015 4/11/2019 SB Chinook Male 860 (Illegible)

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 53 U.S Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office Table A.1. continued

Hatchery or Collection Method Species Sex FL (cm) Tag code creek Run Brood Year date of origin

4/11/2019 SB Chinook Female 740 055856 CNFH Late-fall 2015 4/16/2019 SB Chinook Female 830 055857 CNFH Late-fall 2015 4/25/2019 SB Chinook Female 730 055869 CNFH Late-fall 2016 4/28/2019 SB Chinook Female 695 055872 CNFH Late-fall 2016 6/24/2019 SB Chinook Male 725 056065 CNFH Fall 2016 7/9/2019 SB Chinook Male 675 (Lost) 7/18/2019 SB Chinook Female 730 056058 CNFH Fall 2016

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 54 U.S Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office

Table A.2. Multiyear coded-wire tag recovered during Coleman National Fish Hatchery (CNFH) spawning building (SB) operations, barrier weir trapping (BWT), snorkel surveys (SS), and fish rescues (FR). Data are included for CNFH steelhead and the following Chinook Salmon (CHN): Livingston Stone National Fish Hatchery (LSNFH) winter CHN, CNFH late-fall run CHN, CNFH fall-run CHN, Feather River Fish Hatchery (FRFH) spring-run CHN, FRFH fall-run CHN, and Butte Creek spring-run CHN from 2001–2019.

Butte LSNFH CNFH CNFH FRFH FRFH Creek CNFH Year Method winter-run late-fall fall-run spring-run fall-run spring-run steelhead CHN run CHN CHN CHN CHN 2001 BWT 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 2001 SS 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2002 BWT 0 143 0 0 0 0 1 2002 SS 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2003 BWT 0 133 0 0 0 0 0 2003 SS 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2004 BWT 0 58 0 0 0 1 0 2005 BWT 0 65 0 0 0 0 0 2005 SS 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 2006 BWT 5 148 0 1 0 0 0 2006 SS 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2007 BWT 0 213 0 0 0 0 1 2008 BWT 0 161 0 1 0 0 0 2009 SB/BWT 0 183 0 0 0 0 0 2010 SB/BWT 0 96 0 0 0 0 0 2010 SS 0 0 0 6 1 0 0 2011 SB 0 101 0 0 0 0 0 2011 SS 0 0 0 0 2 0 0

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 55 U.S Fish and Wildlife Service Red Bluff Fish and Wildlife Office Table A.2. continued

Butte LSNFH CNFH CNFH FRFH FRFH Creek CNFH Year Method winter-run late-fall fall-run spring-run fall-run spring-run steelhead CHN run CHN CHN CHN CHN 2012 SB/BWT 0 27 0 0 0 0 0 2012 SS 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 2013 SB 0 85 0 0 0 0 0 2013 SS 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2013 FR 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2014 SB 0 196 0 0 0 0 0 2014 SS 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2015 SB 0 26 0 0 0 0 0 2016 SB 0 46 0 0 0 0 0 2017 SB 0 25 0 0 0 0 0 2018 SB 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2019 SB 0 81 2 0 0 0 0

2019 Battle Creek Adult Report 56