Rock Island and Rocky Reach Dams, 2001

MOVEMENT OF BULL TROUT WITHIN THE MID-COLUMBIA RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, 2001-2002

Final

ROCKY REACH HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC Project No. 2145

November 20, 2002

Prepared by: BioAnalysts, Inc. Boise, Idaho

Prepared for: Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County Wenatchee, Washington

Movement of Bull Trout TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION...... 1

SECTION 2: PROJECT AREA ...... 3

SECTION 3: METHODS ...... 9 3.1 Number of Bull Trout Tagged...... 9 3.2 Trapping Facilities ...... 10 3.3 Tagging Procedures...... 11 3.4 Transport and Release...... 12 3.5 Fish Monitoring Systems ...... 13

SECTION 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ...... 25 4.1 Mortalities ...... 28 4.2 Migration Rate and Fallback...... 28 4.3 Tributary Selection and Residence...... 32 4.4 Mainstem Habitat Use...... 35

SECTION 5: CONCLUSIONS...... 43

SECTION 6: ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...... 45

SECTION 7: REFERENCES...... 47

LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Weekly adult bull trout tagging schedules for Rock Island and Rocky Reach dams, 2001. Tagging schedules were based on the proportion observed (counted) during the same period during the 2000 migration...... 10 Table 2: Description of the 39 adult bull trout tagged at Rock Island, Rocky Reach, and Wells dams from 15 May to 13 July 2001...... 27 Table 3: Summary of migration time (days) for adult radio-tagged bull trout that traveled between fixed station telemetry sites. Fixed station telemetry sites were located at the tailrace and ladder exits at Rock Island, Rocky Reach, and Wells dams and within tributaries. Migration time was only assessed for actively migrating fish...... 31 Table 4: Summary of tributaries selected by adult bull trout and the times that they entered and left those tributaries, 2001...... 34 Table 5: Number of visits and length of time that eleven bull trout were detected within the Wells Hatchery outfall. The mean, minimum, maximum and total times are in hours and the elapsed time is in days. The elapsed time is defined as the period of time between the first and last detections at this location...... 38

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Final Report SS/3885 Page i November 20, 2002 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Study area for assessing migration patterns of bull trout in the mid-Columbia River. Fixed radiotelemetry sites monitored the movement of bull trout near Priest Rapids, Wanapum, Rock Island, Rocky Reach, and Wells dams. Fixed sites placed in the Wenatchee, Entiat, Methow, and Okanogan rivers monitored time of entry and exodus of bull trout in large tributaries of the mid-Columbia River...... 4 Figure 2: Columbia River flows passing through Wells Dam during the period May through October, 2001...... 5 Figure 3: Columbia River flows passing through Rocky Reach and Rock Island dams during the period May through October, 2001...... 6 Figure 4: Columbia River flows passing through Wanapum and Priest Rapids dams during the period May through October, 2001...... 7 Figure 5: Passage distribution plotted by week for bull trout passing Rock Island Dam, 2000, and proposed sampling distribution to achieve a sample size of 10 radio-tagged fish. Dates represent the beginning of the week on Sunday...... 15 Figure 6: Passage distribution plotted by week for bull trout at Rocky Reach Dam and proposed sampling distribution to achieve a sample size of 20 radio-tagged fish. Dates represent the beginning of the week on Sunday...... 16 Figure 7: Time of passage for bull trout counted at Rocky Reach Dam ladder from 15 April to 31 November 2000 and 2001...... 17 Figure 8: Time of passage for bull trout counted at Rock Island Dam ladders from 15 April to 31 November 2000 and 2001...... 18 Figure 9: Plan view of Rock Island Dam fish trap showing movement of bull trout past the viewing window and the pneumatic gate open for entry into fish trap...... 19 Figure 10: Plan view of Rocky Reach Dam trap showing movement of bull trout past the viewing window and the pneumatic gate open for entry into fish trap...... 20 Figure 11: Bull trout release locations upstream (1) and downstream (2) of Rock Island Dam...... 21 Figure 12: Bull trout release locations upstream (1) and downstream (2) of Rocky Reach Dam...... 22 Figure 13: Bull trout release locations upstream (1) and downstream (2) of Wells Dam. Location of hatchery outfall (3) is also identified on the map...... 23 Figure 14: Mid-Columbia River tributaries selected by bull trout after they were released upstream and downstream from Rock Island Dam, 2001. Final destination for radio-tagged bull trout within each tributary is noted in Table 5...... 39 Figure 15: Mid-Columbia River tributaries selected by bull trout after they were released upstream and downstream from Rocky Reach Dam, 2001. Final destination for radio-tagged bull trout within each tributary is noted in Table 5...... 40 Figure 16: Mid-Columbia River tributaries selected by bull trout after they were released upstream and downstream from Wells Dam, 2001. Final destination for radio-tagged bull trout within each tributary is noted in Table 5...... 41 Figure 17: Diel pattern for 11 radio-tagged bull trout detected at the Wells hatchery outfall. There were 73 visits to the hatchery outfall, but most (58) occurred between 0500-2100 hrs...... 42

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Final Report SS/3885 Page ii November 20, 2002 Movement of Bull Trout

SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION

On June 10, 1998, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) listed bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) within the Columbia River basin as threatened under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) (50 CFR 63(111)). Later (November 1, 1999), the Service listed bull trout within the coterminous United States as threatened under the ESA (50 CFR 64(210)). The Service identified habitat degradation, fragmentation and alterations associated with dewatering, road construction and maintenance, mining, and grazing; blockage of migratory corridors by dams or other diversion structures; poor water quality; incidental angler harvest; entrainment into diversion channels; and introduced non-native species as major factors affecting the distribution and abundance of bull trout. They noted that dams (and natural barriers) have isolated population segments resulting in a loss of genetic exchange among these segments (50 CFR 63(111):31657). The Service believes many populations are now isolated and disjunct.

In a letter to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), the Service requested consultation under Section 7 of the ESA regarding the effects of hydroelectric project operations on bull trout in the Columbia River (letter from M. Miller, USFWS, to M. Robinson, FERC, dated January 10, 2000). The request for consultation was based on observations of bull trout in the study area. In its reply to the Service, the FERC noted that there was virtually no information on bull trout in the mainstem Columbia River.

Because bull trout within the mid-Columbia River area are listed under the ESA (50 CFR 63(111):31651), and they may be affected by the operation of hydro-projects owned and operated by Chelan, Douglas, and Grant PUDs (Mid-Columbia PUDs), the Mid-Columbia PUDs decided to evaluate the status of bull trout in the project area. Currently, little is known about the life-history characteristics (e.g., movements, distribution, habitat use, etc.) of bull trout in the mid-Columbia River. Therefore, in order to assess the operational effects of hydroelectric projects on adult bull trout within the mid-Columbia, we inserted radio tags into thirty-nine adult sized bull trout collected at three Mid-Columbia River dams. We tracked these fish to describe their movements and migration patterns within the mid-Columbia Basin.

Our specific objectives were to: (1) describe the movements and migration patterns of adult bull trout in the mid-Columbia system and (2) assess the effects of hydroelectric operations on the movement and migration patterns of adult bull trout in the mid-Columbia River. Results presented here represent the first year of a two-year study. Therefore, any conclusions drawn from this work at this time are tentative. We will complete a final report with additional data and analyses after the second year of study. This report is simply an interim progress report.

Final Report Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 November 20, 2002 Page 1 SS/3885

Movement of Bull Trout

SECTION 2: PROJECT AREA

The primary geographical area of interest was the mainstem Columbia River from Priest Rapids Dam to Chief Joseph Dam (Figure 1). It is within this area that we assessed the effects of Priest Rapids, Wanapum, Rock Island, Rocky Reach, and Wells dams on the movement and migration patterns of adult bull trout. At these dams, we placed fixed-site radio telemetry systems to monitor the movements of radio-tagged bull trout. The study area also included the four major tributaries to the mid-Columbia River, Wenatchee, Entiat, Methow, and Okanogan systems. Both fixed-site and mobile telemetry systems were used to monitor the movement of radio-tagged bull trout within these systems.

Columbia River flows passing through the mid-Columbia River projects during the period May through October, 2001, are shown in Figure 2, Figure 3, and Figure 4. Spill, which can affect the fall-back rate of upstream migrants, occurred at Wells Dam up through August (Figure 2). There was no spill at Rocky Reach Dam during the study period and spill at Rock Island ended the middle of May (Figure 3). Wanapum and Priest Rapids dams spilled throughout the study period, but at a much reduced rate during August through October (Figure 4).

Final Report Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 November 20, 2002 Page 3 SS/3885 Movement of Bull Trout

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Final Report SS/3885 Page 4 November 20, 2002 Movement of Bull Trout

Wells Dam Other Turbine 140 Discharge (kcfs) Spill 120

100

Mean Daily Discharge (kcfs) 20

0 5/1 5/31 6/30 7/30 8/29 9/28 10/28 Date

Figure 2: Columbia River flows passing through Wells Dam during the period May through October, 2001.

Final Report Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 November 20, 2002 Page 5 SS/3885 Movement of Bull Trout

Rocky Reach Dam Other 120 Discharge (kcfs) Turbine Spill 100

Mean Daily Discharge (kcfs) 20

0 5/1 5/31 6/30 7/30 8/29 9/28 10/28 Date

Other Rock Island Dam 140 Turbine Discharge (kcfs) Spill 120

100

20 Mean Daily Discharge (kcfs)

0 5/1 5/31 6/30 7/30 8/29 9/28 10/28 Date

Figure 3: Columbia River flows passing through Rocky Reach and Rock Island dams during the period May through October, 2001.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Final Report SS/3885 Page 6 November 20, 2002 Movement of Bull Trout

Other Wanapum Dam 160 Turbine Discharge (kcfs) Spill 140

120

100

Mean Daily Discharge (kcfs) 20

0 5/1 5/31 6/30 7/30 8/29 9/28 10/28 Date

Priest Rapids Dam Other 160 Turbine Discharge (kcfs) Spill 140

120

100

Mean Daily Discharge (kcfs) 20

0 5/1 5/31 6/30 7/30 8/29 9/28 10/28 Date

Figure 4: Columbia River flows passing through Wanapum and Priest Rapids dams during the period May through October, 2001.

Final Report Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 November 20, 2002 Page 7 SS/3885

Movement of Bull Trout

SECTION 3: METHODS

This study relied on radio tags for monitoring the movements and migration patterns of adult bull trout in the mid-Columbia River. Below we describe in detail the number of fish tagged, tagging procedures, and monitoring systems.

3.1 Number of Bull Trout Tagged To assess the movements and migration patterns of adult bull trout, we originally proposed to tag a total of 40 bull trout in the mid-Columbia River. This number was based on discussions with the Service and represented approximately 20% of all bull trout counted at the dams in previous years. The number of trout collected and tagged at each dam was based on the proportion of fish that migrated past those dams in 2000. Typically, the greatest numbers of bull trout are observed at Rocky Reach Dam, with smaller numbers observed at Rock Island and Wells dams. Based on this information, we originally intended to collect and tag 10 adult bull trout at Rock Island Dam, 20 at Rocky Reach Dam, and 10 at Wells Dam during mid-May to late-June 2001.

To avoid a temporal bias in our sampling program, we collected bull trout throughout the migration period (14 May to 29 June) at Rocky Reach and Rock Island dams by establishing weekly tagging targets. These weekly targets were based on the proportion of fish observed at each project during the 2000 bull trout migration period (Table 1; Figure 5 and Figure 6). That is, we captured bull trout throughout the passage period, but collected and tagged a greater number during the peak period of passage.

In order to describe the passage distribution, we compiled numbers of bull trout passing Rocky Reach and Rock Island dams during each week of the 2000 migration. We then calculated the proportion of the total run that passed each project during each weekly time period. From the product of the weekly proportions and total sample sizes (i.e., 10 fish at Rock Island and 20 fish at Rocky Reach), we estimated the numbers of bull trout to be captured and tagged at each dam during each week of the 2001 sampling period (Table 1; Figure 5 and Figure 6). At Rocky Reach Dam, at most five fish were to be collected and tagged during a given sampling week (Table 1; Figure 6). At Rock Island Dam, a total of three fish was the maximum number to be collected and tagged during a sampling week (Table 1; Figure 5). Because of the desire to maintain the predetermined tagging schedule, it was decided that if the weekly tagging quotas were not met at either project, the deficit would be carried into the following week.

Diel passage data for adult bull trout at Rocky Reach and Rock Island dams indicated that most bull trout passed the projects between 0800-2300 hours (Figure 7 and Figure 8). Since the upstream release of radio-tagged fish at Rocky Reach Dam required logistical support from Chelan PUD, we decided to operate the traps between 0800-1700 hours.

We established no weekly tagging goals for collecting bull trout at Wells Dam. This was because of the desire to minimize the overall trapping time so as to reduce potential harassment to migrating chinook salmon and steelhead. Collection and tagging began at Wells Dam on 21 May and continued through May with the trap operating Monday through Wednesday between 1200-2000 hours.

Final Report Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 November 20, 2002 Page 9 SS/3885 Movement of Bull Trout

Table 1: Weekly adult bull trout tagging schedules for Rock Island and Rocky Reach dams, 2001. Tagging schedules were based on the proportion observed (counted) during the same period during the 2000 migration.

Date Rock Island Dam Rocky Reach Dam Week Beginning Count Tag Count Tag 1 14-May 4 1 37 5 2 21-May 16 3 25 4 3 28-May 8 1 23 3 4 4-June 7 1 18 3 5 11-June 12 2 13 2 6 18-June 6 1 12 2 7 25-June 6 1 11 1 Totals 59 10 139 20

3.2 Trapping Facilities

3.2.1 Rocky Reach and Rock Island Dams Because adequate trapping facilities did not exist at Rocky Reach or Rock Island dams, it was necessary to design and install traps at both projects that would minimize harm and harassment to ESA-listed species. Chelan PUD contracted with Montgomery Watson to design collection facilities for Rocky Reach and Rock Island fish ladders.

The trapping facilities were designed to integrate with the existing fish-viewing structures within the ladders (Figure 9 and Figure 10). Essentially, the fish-viewing guide wall was extended upstream to the exit weir and a pneumatically-activated gate was installed within the guide wall.

On the other side of the pneumatic gate was a collection area, which contained a removable capture vessel. As a bull trout entered the viewing area, a technician activated the pneumatic gate, which blocked passage into the forebay and diverted the bull trout into the collection area. Using an underwater camera, the technician could observe the bull trout enter the collection area, at which time the gate would be closed, trapping the bull trout. Non-target species and small bull trout (<40 cm) were allowed to exit the ladder by simply not activating the pneumatic gate. After a bull trout was contained within the collection area, a hand-operated winch raised the collection vessel from the collection area up to the work-surface platform. As the vessel emerged from the water, we placed a wooden cover on top of the vessel to reduce stress to the fish and eliminate the possibility of the fish jumping out of the vessel.

We then transferred the captured trout from the collection vessel to the surgical facility. To facilitate transport and reduce handling stress, we sedated bull trout with MS-222 (at a concentration of 80 mg/L) while they were contained in the collection vessel (see Surgical Techniques for detailed description of sedation). At Rocky Reach Dam, the collection vessel was moved laterally along an

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Final Report SS/3885 Page 10 November 20, 2002 Movement of Bull Trout

I-beam monorail, which placed it near the surgical facility located under the roadway of the ladder. We then transferred the fish by hand to the surgical table for processing. At Rock Island Dam, the surgical facility was located within a trailer approximately 10 m from the collection area. There, we transferred fish in a rubber bladder filled with anesthetic water to the surgical facility.

3.2.2 Wells Dam Bull trout at Wells Dam were trapped at the brood-stock collection facility located within the left bank ladder. The brood-stock collection facility is located at Pool 40, approximately half way up the fish ladder. The trap is operated by placing a barrier fence across the entire width of Pool 40. When the trap is in operation, all fish ascending the left bank ladder are blocked by the barrier fence and are forced to ascend the off-ladder trap via a steep pass denil which leads to an upwell enclosure. Once inside the upwell enclosure, fish are attracted down a sorting chute by jets of water, introduced into the upwell enclosure, located near the top of the sorting chute. As the fish slide down the sorting chute, they are identified and a decision is made to either divert the fish into the holding tank or to allow the fish to pass upstream of the trap. When a bull trout was observed in the chute, a technician activated a pneumatic gate, and the fish is diverted into a 600-gallon holding tank. Non-target species and small bull trout (<40 cm) were shunted back to the ladder upstream of the trapping barrier. The fish ladder supplied the holding tank with freshwater at a rate of 30 to 40 gal/hr to maintain adequate dissolved oxygen and temperature levels. At the time of tagging, bull trout were netted from the holding vessel and transferred to an anesthetic vessel containing an 80 mg/l solution of MS-222. Once anesthetized, we transferred the fish to a mobile surgical station for further processing.

3.3 Tagging Procedures

3.3.1 Description of Radio Tags We implanted adult bull trout with digitally-encoded transmitters developed by Lotek Engineering. The transmitter, model MCFT-3FM, was 11 mm in diameter, 59 mm long, and weighed 4.6 grams in water and 10.3 grams in air. With a 2.5-second burst rate, the estimated life of the transmitter was 360 days.

Winter (1983) identified a criterion of 2% for the ratio of transmitter to body weight (in air) as being acceptable. For transmitters used in this study, that criterion would allow the tagging of trout equal to or greater than 515 grams. However, more recent information suggests that a radio transmitter that is as much as 5-10% of the fish’s body weight will not adversely affect fish behavior (Adams et al. 1998). Using the criterion of 5% would allow the tagging of fish as small as 206 grams, and 10% would allow the tagging of fish as small as 103 grams. Taking a conservative approach, we decided to only tag fish with a fork length greater than 40 cm (~700 grams). Based on this strategy, at most, the transmitter would amount to 1.5% of the fish’s body weight.

3.3.2 Surgical Techniques Our surgical procedures followed methods described in Summerfelt and Smith (1990), with some modifications based on consultation with the Service. We anesthetized bull trout in a pre-operative solution of tricaine methanesulfonate (MS 222) at a concentration of 80 mg/l. Service biologists found that 80 mg/l of MS 222 for initial induction, followed by a concentration of 40 mg/l during surgery was adequate to maintain anesthesia during implantation of transmitters in bull trout (J. De

Final Report Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 November 20, 2002 Page 11 SS/3885 Movement of Bull Trout

La Vergne, USFWS, personal communication). Before preparation of the pre-operative solution of MS-222, the water was sampled for pH. If the solution was acidic (pH<7.0), it was buffered with sodium bicarbonate to maintain a pH of 7, thereby reducing physiological stress associated with anesthesia (Wedemeyer 1970). After sedation, the fish was weighed, measured, and a genetic sample was taken from the upper lobe of the caudal fin. In addition, we removed scales from bull trout collected at Wells Dam for aging analysis. Genetic samples were preserved and provided to the Service. Genetic characterization was not a task of this study; therefore, genetic results are not presented in this report.

After fully sedated, we placed the fish on a V-shaped cradle in preparation for surgery. From the time when the fish was placed onto the surgical cradle until surgery was completed, a surgical assistant flushed the gills of the fish with a 40-mg/l solution of MS-222 using a large bulb-type syringe. During this process gill activity was monitored, and if necessary, either freshwater or a stronger solution of MS-222 (80 mg/l) was used to maintain the desired level of anesthesia. Before surgery, we sterilized all surgical instruments and the radio-transmitter in 100% ethyl alcohol and rinsed them with a 3% solution of sodium chloride to prevent irritation at the incision site.

Before making the incision, we swabbed the tissue with iodine to decrease the likelihood of post- operative infection. An incision about 2-cm long was made lateral to the linea alba and about 2 cm anterior of the pelvic girdle through the musculature of the fish. We then inserted a 16-gauge cannula sheathed within a Teflon tube (to protect internal organs) into the body cavity of the fish. The cannula was positioned at an angle of 45 degrees to the medial line of the fish, and distill to the posterior end of the incision. Once the cannula was inserted into the fish, the Teflon sheath was removed and the transmitter antenna was inserted into the cannula. We then removed the cannula and inserted the transmitter into the body cavity of the fish. The body cavity was closed with 3 to 4 internally-knotted absorbable sutures and swabbed with iodine. Veterinary tissue glue was applied to both the incision and the exit site of the transmitter antenna.

After surgery, we transferred the fish to a large cooler (52 quarts) that was supplied with river water. We held the fish until equilibrium was achieved (typically 15 to 30 minutes). The same vessel was used for post-operative recovery, transport, and release. During the handling procedure, start and completion times were recorded for surgery, recovery, transport, and release. In addition, the water temperature within the recovery/transport vessel was monitored before transport and release.

3.4 Transport and Release We followed the same general transport procedures at release sites near Rock Island and Wells dams. Typically, after the fish had recovered, we loaded the transport vessel, which contained the fish and was supplied with air delivered through an air stone, into a truck and transported the fish quickly to the release site. At the release site, we removed the air and transported the vessel into the river. We recorded the water temperature within the vessel and also in the river. The vessel was then gently rolled onto its side and the lid was opened allowing the fish to swim free of the vessel. The swimming behavior of the fish was observed and any abnormalities were noted.

The transport procedures described above differed slightly for fish tagged and released at Rocky Reach Dam. Because the surgical station was located under a roadway within the fish ladder, it was not possible to carry the holding vessel to the upper deck for transport to the release site. For fish

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Final Report SS/3885 Page 12 November 20, 2002 Movement of Bull Trout

released into the tailrace of Rocky Reach Dam, we loaded the vessel into a boat and transported the vessel to the boat dock located about 50 m upstream from the dam on the right bank. A truck then transported the vessel from the dock to the release site downstream from the dam. For fish released into the forebay, the vessel was loaded into a boat and transported directly to the release site. We released fish according to the procedures described above.

At the request of the Service, at each of the three dams we released half the fish downstream from the dam and half upstream. The purpose of this release strategy was to increase the sample size of fish ascending the ladder systems at each of the projects where fish were collected and tagged. For fish released upstream from the dam, we released them as close as possible to the dam, but outside the influence of the forebay flownet. Figure 11, Figure 12 and Figure 13 show specific release locations.

3.5 Fish Monitoring Systems

3.5.1 Fixed Telemetry We used multiple-telemetry techniques to assess the movement of tagged bull trout within the study area. At Priest Rapids, Wanapum, Rock Island, Rocky Reach, and Wells dams, we deployed a combination of aerial and underwater antennas. The primary purpose for these systems was to document the presence of bull trout at each project, specific to either the forebay or tailrace. In addition to these systems, a number of additional telemetry systems were deployed to address specific questions posed by each of the three PUDs. Within the Wanapum reservoir, we established three transects by deploying a total of six telemetry systems at three locations on opposite sides of the river (R.K. 702.8, R.K. 698.8, and R.K. 694.1). These systems were deployed to monitor movement of tagged fish downstream from Rock Island Dam. We removed these transects after the fish moved into tributaries. When the trout moved back into the Columbia River, we used aerial and boat surveys to document the occurrence of tagged trout in Wanapum Reservoir.

At Rock Island, Rocky Reach, and Wells dams, we installed additional systems to identify tagged bull trout that could enter, ascend, and exit specific gates and fish ladders. At these projects, all possible access points to the adult fish ladders and the exits were monitored individually, allowing the route of passage to be determined as well as the ability to establish the exact time of entrance and exit from the ladder system. English et al. (1998, 2001) provided a detailed description of the telemetry systems at each of the dams and within the tributaries.

To assess movement within and among tributaries, we used both fixed-telemetry sites and aerial surveys within the Wenatchee, Entiat, Methow, and Okanogan rivers (see English et al. 1998, 2001). In the Wenatchee River basin, we deployed two fixed-telemetry sites. The downstream site was located at the Wenatchee River County Park (R.K. 12.5) and the upstream site at Tumwater Dam (R.K. 49.4). In the Entiat River basin, we deployed a single system located at R.K. 4.8. In the Methow basin, we established two telemetry sites, one at R.K. 2.4 and the other at R.K. 17.5. In the Okanogan basin, we installed a single system at R.K. 9.0. At each of these locations, two 3- or 4- element Yagi antennas were deployed and monitored separately, with one antenna aimed downstream and the other upstream. This allowed us to assess the presence and direction of travel of bull trout at each site.

Final Report Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 November 20, 2002 Page 13 SS/3885 Movement of Bull Trout

3.5.2 Aerial Surveys We conducted aerial surveys bi-weekly from June 2001 to the end of March 2002. Because of inclement weather, forest fires, and FAA restrictions (following 11 September 2001), we canceled five aerial surveys. We conducted aerial surveys in the Wenatchee, Entiat, Methow, and Okanogan systems. However, because no bull trout were detected at the fixed-telemetry site on the Okanogan River, only a single survey of that basin was conducted. In the other basins, aerial surveys covered the mainstems to natural barriers or to points of safe access for fixed-wing aircraft. In addition, where possible, aerial surveys were conducted in smaller tributaries where bull trout presence was likely.

3.5.3 Boat Surveys To assess general habitat use in the mainstem Columbia River, we conducted bi-weekly boat surveys in Rock Island and Rocky Reach reservoirs. Surveys were conducted by traveling both upstream and downstream within the given reservoir, with each leg of the survey oriented on opposite shores to maximize the likelihood of detecting tagged trout. To maximize detection range and depth of tagged fish, two 6-element Yagi antennas were mounted to 10-foot masts on either side of the boat and were aimed about 15 degrees outward of the mid-line of the boat. When a tagged trout was detected, it was tracked with the aerial antennas to a point where it was in close proximity to the boat. At that time, we used a bared-coax antenna to track and log the fish. Given the detection range of a bared-coax antenna (~8 m), we were able to describe only general habitat characteristics (depth, bottom structure, and distance from shore) at the location of the tagged fish.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Final Report SS/3885 Page 14 November 20, 2002 Movement of Bull Trout

Rock Island Dam

10 Passage Distribution Number

0 Jul 02 Jul 09 Jul 16 Jul 23 Jul 30 Jul Apr 16 Apr 23 Apr 30 Apr Jun 04 Jun 11 Jun 18 Jun 25 Jun Aug 06 Aug 13 Aug 20 Aug 27 Sep 03 Sep 10 Sep 17 Sep 24 Nov 01 Nov 08 Nov 15 May 07 May 14 May 21 May 28

Number Sampling Distribution 1

0 Jul 02 Jul 09 Jul 16 Jul 23 Jul 30 Jul Apr 16 Apr 23 Apr 30 Jun 04 Jun 11 Jun 18 Jun 25 Jun Aug 06 Aug 13 Aug 20 Aug 27 Aug 03 Sep 10 Sep 17 Sep 24 Sep Nov 01 Nov 08 Nov 15 Nov May 07 May 14 May 21 May 28 Week

Figure 5: Passage distribution plotted by week for bull trout passing Rock Island Dam, 2000, and proposed sampling distribution to achieve a sample size of 10 radio-tagged fish. Dates represent the beginning of the week on Sunday.

Final Report Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 November 20, 2002 Page 15 SS/3885 Movement of Bull Trout

40 Rocky Reach Dam

Number Passage Distribution

0 Jul 02 Jul 09 Jul 16 Jul 23 Jul 30 Jul Apr 16 Apr 23 Apr 30 Apr Jun 04 Jun 11 Jun 18 Jun 25 Aug 06 Aug 13 Aug 20 Aug 27 Sep 03 Sep 10 Sep 17 Sep 24 Nov 01 Nov 08 Nov 15 Nov May 07 May 14 May 21 May 28 May

Number 2 Sampling Distribution

0 Jul 02 Jul 09 Jul 16 Jul 23 Jul 30 Jul Apr 16 Apr 23 Apr 30 Jun 04 Jun 11 Jun 18 Jun 25 Aug 06 Aug 13 Aug 20 Aug 27 Sep 03 Sep 10 Sep 17 Sep 24 Nov 01 Nov 08 Nov 15 Nov May 07 May 14 May 21 May 28 May Week

Figure 6: Passage distribution plotted by week for bull trout at Rocky Reach Dam and proposed sampling distribution to achieve a sample size of 20 radio-tagged fish. Dates represent the beginning of the week on Sunday.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Final Report SS/3885 Page 16 November 20, 2002 Movement of Bull Trout

Rocky Reach Dam 2001

15 Numbers 10

0 0000 0100 0200 0300 0400 0500 0600 0700 0800 0900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 2100 2200 2300 Military Time

Figure 7: Time of passage for bull trout counted at Rocky Reach Dam ladder from 15 April to 31 November 2000 and 2001.

Final Report Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 November 20, 2002 Page 17 SS/3885 Movement of Bull Trout

Rock Island Dam 2001

Number 4

0 0000 0100 0200 0300 0400 0500 0600 0700 0800 0900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 2100 2200 2300 Military Time

Figure 8: Time of passage for bull trout counted at Rock Island Dam ladders from 15 April to 31 November 2000 and 2001.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Final Report SS/3885 Page 18 November 20, 2002 Movement of Bull Trout

Figure 9: Plan view of Rock Island Dam fish trap showing movement of bull trout past the viewing window and the pneumatic gate open for entry into fish trap.

Final Report Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 November 20, 2002 Page 19 SS/3885 Movement of Bull Trout

Figure 10: Plan view of Rocky Reach Dam trap showing movement of bull trout past the viewing window and the pneumatic gate open for entry into fish trap.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Final Report SS/3885 Page 20 November 20, 2002 Movement of Bull Trout

Figure 11: Bull trout release locations upstream (1) and downstream (2) of Rock Island Dam.

Final Report Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 November 20, 2002 Page 21 SS/3885 Movement of Bull Trout

Figure 12: Bull trout release locations upstream (1) and downstream (2) of Rocky Reach Dam.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Final Report SS/3885 Page 22 November 20, 2002 Movement of Bull Trout

Figure 13: Bull trout release locations upstream (1) and downstream (2) of Wells Dam. Location of hatchery outfall (3) is also identified on the map.

Final Report Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 November 20, 2002 Page 23 SS/3885

Movement of Bull Trout

SECTION 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Following our sampling protocol, we tagged and released a total of 39 adult bull trout in the mid- Columbia River (Table 2). We fell short of our tagging goal of 40 fish because few adult bull trout passed Rock Island Dam. After extending our sampling program one week at Rock Island Dam, we were able to capture and tag only seven adult bull trout there. Four of these were released upstream from the dam and three downstream from the dam. In an effort to capture and tag a total of 40 adult trout, we extended the sampling period to mid-July at Rocky Reach Dam. There we captured and tagged 22 adult bull trout (two more than originally planned). We released 11 upstream and 11 downstream from the dam. At Wells dam, we collected and tagged 10 adult bull trout by the end of May, releasing half upstream and the other half downstream from the dam.

Sizes and weights of trout captured and tagged varied little among the three collection facilities (Table 2). Overall, the 39 trout averaged 53.8 cm fork length (range, 40.9-59.7 cm) and 1,771 g (range, 850-2,500 g). For bull trout tagged at Rock Island Dam, the mean length and weight were 52.7 cm (range, 40.9-59.7 cm) and 1,593 g (range, 850-2,200 g), respectively. For bull trout tagged at Rocky Reach Dam, the respective mean length and weight were 52.9 cm (range, 46.0-58.9 cm) and 1,684 g (range, 1,100-2,400 g). Finally, for bull trout tagged at Wells Dam, the mean length and weight were 56.6 cm (range, 53.3-59.7 cm) and 2,080 g (range, 1,700-2,500 g), respectively.

At Wells Dam, we collected scales from 10 bull trout, nine of which were implanted with radio transmitters and the other was released upstream from the dam without being tagged. Two of these were age-5 fish and had a mean fork length of 55.6 cm. Six were age-6 fish with a mean fork length of 54.6 cm. Scale regeneration precluded the aging of the remaining two fish. These data do not comport with age/length relationships for resident bull trout in the Methow basin. In the Methow basin, Mullan et al. (1992) found the mean fork lengths of age-5 and 6 bull trout to be only 19.5 cm and 22.8 cm, respectively. These observations indicate that the resident forms are considerably smaller than their migrant forms.

For the 39 bull trout captured and tagged at the three collection locations, the mean surgical, recovery, and transport times were 8.0, 13.5, and 11.3 minutes, respectively. The surgical and recovery times at the three dams were similar. However, the transport times for the different release sites varied somewhat because of road conditions and distance traveled to the release sites. Nevertheless, the mean overall time from start to finish (surgery, recovery, transport, and release) among tagging locations varied by only 6.6 minutes, with the Rock Island upstream releases requiring only 28.8 minutes and the Wells upstream releases requiring 35.4 minutes.

Water temperatures within the transport vessel changed little from the time of recovery to the time of release in the river. On only three occasions did the water temperature increase during the time the fish were held in the vessel. On two occasions the temperature increased 0.5°C and on another occasion the temperature increased 1.0°C. In all three cases, however, the increase in temperature during transport probably benefited the fish. That is, for these three fish, the temperature at the release site was higher than the water temperature at the collection site. The increase within the transport vessel served to acclimate fish to the higher temperature of the release location.

Final Report Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 November 20, 2002 Page 25 SS/3885 Movement of Bull Trout

Differences in temperatures between the collection site and release site were more common. For fish tagged and released at Rock Island and Rocky Reach dams (n = 29), differences in temperatures between the collection and release sites occurred on six occasions (Table 2), but the difference in temperature never varied by more than 1°C. At Wells Dam, temperatures at the collection and release sites differed during the release of all trout. For the downstream and upstream release sites, temperature differences ranged from 1.0 and 3.5°C and 0.5 and 4.0°C, respectively. While these temperature differences did not appear to affect survival or behavior of the fish exposed to them, it is possible that behavior immediately after release could have been affected. However, we observed no abnormal behavior immediately after release.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Final Report SS/3885 Page 26 November 20, 2002 Movement of Bull Trout

Table 2: Description of the 39 adult bull trout tagged at Rock Island, Rocky Reach, and Wells dams from 15 May to 13 July 2001.

Collection Transmitter Fish Size Surgery Time Transport Time Transport Temp Release Date Time Chan. Code Length Weight Begin End Begin End Begin End Temp Location Rock Island Dam 17-May 0845 14 4 54.1 1,700 1553 1603 1619 1630 12.0 12.0 12.0 Up 21-May 1253 14 32 51.6 1,550 1431 1442 1500 1511 13.5 14.0 14.0 Down 24-May 1430 14 13 50.8 1,500 1913 1923 1934 1942 14.0 14.0 14.0 UP 30-May 0950 14 35 53.6 1,600 1101 1108 1124 1137 13.5 13.5 14.0 Down 13-Jun 1649 14 36 59.7 1,750 1753 1801 1812 1818 14.0 14.0 14.5 Up 19-Jun 1430 14 55 40.9 850 1547 1554 1601 1612 15.5 15.5 15.0 Down 03-Jul 0933 14 48 58.2 2,200 1003 1011 1021 1027 15.5 15.5 16.5 Up Mean: 52.7 1,592.9 Minimum: 40.9 850.0 Maximum: 59.7 2,200.0 Rocky Reach Dam 15-May 1711 14 3 53.3 --- 1813 1824 1835 1841 12.0 12.0 12.0 Up 17-May 1515 14 5 58.4 2,310 1744 1755 1805 1818 12.0 12.0 12.0 Down 21-May 1551 14 29 52.1 1,550 1633 1644 1655 1709 13.5 13.5 13.5 Down 21-May 1111 14 20 51.6 1,700 1235 1249 1259 1306 12.5 13.5 13.5 Up 22-May 1236 14 24 54.1 1,800 1355 1406 1414 1425 13.0 13.0 13.0 Up 23-May 1535 14 18 57.2 2,050 1603 1611 1629 1643 13.0 13.0 13.0 Down 24-May 1626 14 12 58.9 2,400 1738 1745 1802 1812 13.0 13.0 13.0 Up 25-May 1256 14 15 56.1 1,950 1401 1408 1424 1433 13.5 13.5 13.5 Down 25-May 1640 14 14 49.0 1,200 1711 1718 1727 1738 14.0 14.0 14.0 Up 29-May 1151 14 11 54.9 2,000 1317 1325 1336 1350 13.0 13.0 13.0 Down 29-May 1545 14 6 56.9 2,000 1914 1922 1931 1939 13.0 13.0 13.0 Up 30-May 1330 14 54 50.5 1,450 1502 1510 1526 1543 13.5 13.5 13.5 Down 04-Jun 1326 14 7 48.5 1,150 1415 1422 1432 1441 13.0 13.0 13.5 Up 06-Jun 1020 14 37 55.4 1,700 1154 1201 1212 1223 13.0 13.0 13.0 Up 07-Jun 1031 14 9 54.9 1,950 1315 1320 1342 1354 13.0 13.0 13.0 Down 11-Jun 1548 14 8 49.8 1,350 1611 1618 1628 1640 13.0 13.0 13.0 Down 15-Jun 0830 14 45 50.8 1,400 1104 1111 1128 1138 13.5 13.5 14.0 Up 18-Jun 1316 14 46 47.2 1,250 1449 1458 1514 1528 14.0 14.0 14.0 Down 19-Jun 1538 14 47 52.6 1,550 1749 1757 1809 1819 14.5 14.5 14.5 Up 25-Jun 1142 14 25 51.3 1,500 1349 1355 1410 1423 15.0 15.0 15.0 Down 10-Jul 1338 14 34 53.6 2,000 1651 1658 1707 1719 17.0 17.5 18.0 Down 13-Jul 0648 14 50 46.0 1,100 918 925 935 945 18.0 18.0 18.0 Up Mean: 52.9 1,683.8 Minimum: 46.0 1,100.0 Maximum: 58.9 2,400.0 Wells 21-May 1645 14 31 57.2 2,350 1844 1854 1906 1923 12.0 12.0 12.5 Up 22-May 1400 14 26 54.1 1,800 1620 1629 1648 1658 12.5 12.5 16.0 Down 22-May 1400 14 19 56.9 2,000 1720 1727 1749 1802 12.5 12.5 16.0 Down 22-May 1400 14 33 54.6 2,000 1738 1745 1749 1802 12.5 12.5 16.0 Down 22-May 1400 14 21 59.7 2,500 1638 1644 1708 1721 12.5 12.5 16.5 Up 22-May 1400 14 28 58.7 2,300 1655 1702 1708 1721 12.5 12.5 16.5 Up 23-May 1900 14 17 57.7 2,300 930 937 949 959 12.0 12.0 13.0 Down 23-May 1500 14 16 56.6 1,700 1806 1812 1820 1835 12.0 12.0 14.5 Up 29-May 1530 14 23 53.3 1,800 1652 1658 1720 1732 13.0 13.0 14.0 Up 29-May 1400 14 22 57.2 2,050 1707 1713 1742 1754 13.0 13.0 14.5 Down Mean: 56.6 2,080.0 Minimum: 53.3 1,700.0 Maximum: 59.7 2,500.0

Final Report Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 November 20, 2002 Page 27 SS/3885 Movement of Bull Trout

4.1 Mortalities We captured and tagged a total of 39 adult bull trout, none of which died during the period from capture to release. All 39 fish appeared to be healthy and exhibited normal behavior upon release. During the monitoring phase of the study, however, we confirmed the loss of one bull trout in the forebay of Rock Island Dam. That fish, captured and tagged on 3 July at Rock Island Dam, was 58.2 cm in length and weighed 2,200 g. All aspects of capture, tagging, recovery, transport, and release were consistent with other fish tagged during the study. Additionally, at the time of release this fish had fully recovered and appeared to behave normally.

We tracked the movements of this fish for several days before it died. After release at Rock Island Dam, the fish traveled to Rocky Reach Dam over the course of 1.5 days and remained within the Rocky Reach tailrace and ladder system for a period of 9 days. Thirteen days later we detected the fish in the forebay of Rock Island Dam. On 3 August, during a routine boat survey, the carcass of the trout was recovered along the shore of an island in the forebay of Rock Island Dam. The carcass consisted only of the vertebral column and skin. We were unable to determine the cause of death. Although an underwater antenna detected the transmitter within 5 m of the carcass, we were unable to retrieve the transmitter. The remaining 38 fish were all alive as of the end of March 2002.

4.2 Migration Rate and Fallback Because of the extensive deployment of telemetry systems at each mainstem dam and near the mouths of major tributaries, we were able to document the length of time each fish spent within various areas at the dams, the elapsed time between dams, the time required to travel from a dam to the next upstream tributary, and whether fallback occurred at any of the projects within the study area. For clarity, we defined the following terms.

• Tailrace residence is the elapsed time between the first detection by the tailrace array and the first detection by the underwater antennas located inside any ladder entrance. • Fishway residence is the elapsed time between the first detection inside any of the ladder entrances to the last detection at that ladder exit. • Elapsed time at the dam is the sum of the tailrace and fishway times. • Elapsed time between dams is the time from last detection at a ladder exit to the time of first detection within the tailrace of the next upstream dam. • Elapsed time from a dam to an upstream tributary is the time from last detection at a ladder exit to the time of entry into an upstream tributary.

For all estimates, we only included fish that were actively migrating upstream. For example, fish that were detected by the tailrace and ladder systems, but migrated downstream and entered a tributary were not used to calculate tailrace residence time. Fallback was assessed by detecting fish downstream from the dam after they exited the ladder system.

4.2.1 Rock Island Dam At Rock Island Dam, we captured and tagged seven adult bull trout. We released three downstream from the dam and four upstream from the dam. Because the telemetry systems monitoring the ladder entrances were not operating at the time fish were released, we could not calculate tailrace or fishway residence times. However, monitoring systems in the tailrace system and the ladder exits

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Final Report SS/3885 Page 28 November 20, 2002 Movement of Bull Trout allowed us to calculate the elapsed time at the dam for the three fish released downstream. For these three fish, their median elapsed time at the dam was 2.28 days (range, 1.30-11.99 days) (Table 3). None of these fish fell back into the tailrace of Rock Island Dam.

Of the seven fish tagged and released at Rock Island Dam, four migrated upstream and were detected in the tailrace of Rocky Reach Dam, and migrated upstream and entered either the Entiat or Methow basins. These four fish covered this distance in a median time of 1.33 days (range, 1.16-1.61 days) (Table 3). Two fish that were detected in the tailrace of Rocky Reach Dam were not included in this estimate. One fish migrated downstream from Rocky Reach Dam and entered the Wenatchee River, while the other died in the Rock Island forebay. Only one fish tagged at Rock Island Dam migrated directly into the Wenatchee River after release. For that fish, the elapsed time between detection at Rock Island and the Wenatchee River was 1.39 days.

4.2.2 Rocky Reach Dam At Rocky Reach Dam, we tagged and released 22 adult bull trout. Of the 11 fish released in the tailrace, six migrated downstream and entered the Wenatchee River system where they resided during the fall and winter. The remaining five fish re-ascended the Rocky Reach ladder system. In sum, nine tagged trout ascended the ladder system at Rocky Reach Dam (five released in the Rocky Reach tailrace and four from Rock Island Dam). For these nine fish, the median tailrace residence was 1.28 days (range, 0.18-5.15 days), median fishway residence was 1.92 days (range, 0.21-5.17 days), and median elapsed time at the dam was 3.79 days (range, 0.78-6.65 days) (Table 3).

At Rocky Reach Dam, the ladder system was accessible through a number of entrances or gates. Possible entrances included the right entrance, a series of O.G. gates (six were operational during the study), the left entrance, and the spillway entrance. The spillway entrance, however, was not operating during upstream migration. Despite the large number of possible entry locations, seven of the nine fish entered the left entrance, while the other two entered the right entrance. No tagged fish entered the ladder system via the O.G. gates. For the nine fish that ascended the Rocky Reach fish ladder, no fish fell back through the dam.

Of the 20 tagged fish upstream from Rocky Reach Dam (includes the nine fish that ascended the ladder and the 11 released into the forebay), 13 entered the Entiat River directly after leaving the project and the remaining seven continued upstream to Wells Dam. For the 13 fish that entered the Entiat River, the median travel time from Rocky Reach to the Entiat River was 7.20 days (range, 3.22-13.08 days). Of the seven fish that traveled upstream and were detected at the Wells tailrace, one fish migrated downstream and later entered the Entiat River. For the six fish that traveled to Wells Dam and subsequently migrated upstream into the Methow River, the median elapsed time between projects was 1.69 days (range, 1.31-2.46 days) (Table 3).

4.2.3 Wells Dam At Wells Dam, we tagged and released 10 adult bull trout. Of the five released into the tailrace, one migrated downstream and entered the Entiat River; the others re-ascended the ladder. In sum, a total of 10 tagged fish passed through Wells Dam and entered the Methow River (two fish from Rock Island, four from Rocky Reach, and four of the five released into the tailrace of Wells Dam). For these 10 fish, the median tailrace residence time was 1.53 days (range, 0.57-5.75 days) (Table 3).

Final Report Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 November 20, 2002 Page 29 SS/3885 Movement of Bull Trout

Although all 10 fish passed Wells Dam, two escaped detection as they passed the left bank ladder exit. It is not clear why these fish escaped detection, but it could be related to signal collision or ambient background noise. Regardless, for the eight fish that were detected at both the ladder entrances and exits as they moved through the system, seven ascended the right fishway and one the left fishway. For the seven fish that ascended the right fishway, the median fishway residence time was 5.45 days (range, 5.14-12.48 days). The fish that ascended the left fishway spent 11.63 days there. Collectively, for the eight fish that were detected within the fishways, the median fishway residence time was 8.87 days (range, 6.02-15.96 days) (Table 3). Of the 10 fish that ascended the Wells Dam fishways, none fell back through the dam.

For the two fish that ascended the left fishway and were not detected at the ladder exit, we were unable to estimate their overall time spent within the ladder (due to the absence of exit detections). However, because we detected all tagged bull trout in the last pool of each ladder before the exits, we can assess migration time from the ladder entrance to that location. For the seven fish that ascended the right fishway, the median time spent between the ladder entrance and the last pool was 5.41 days (compared to 5.45 days through the entire ladder) (Table 3). For the three fish that ascended the left fishway, the median time spent between the ladder entrance and the last pool was 2.24 days (range, 2.11-11.55 days), compared to the single fish that spent 11.63 days in the ladder (Table 3).

A total of 15 tagged bull trout (the ten fish that passed Wells Dam plus the five released upstream from the dam) migrated upstream from Wells Dam and entered the Methow River system, where they resided during the fall and winter. Because two of the 10 fish that passed the dam were not detected at the ladder exits, migration rate from the dam to the Methow River was based on 13 fish. The median time for these 13 fish from Wells Dam to the Methow River was 0.40 days (range, 0.27- 6.15 days) (Table 3).

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Final Report SS/3885 Page 30 November 20, 2002 Movement of Bull Trout

Table 3: Summary of migration time (days) for adult radio-tagged bull trout that traveled between fixed station telemetry sites. Fixed station telemetry sites were located at the tailrace and ladder exits at Rock Island, Rocky Reach, and Wells dams and within tributaries. Migration time was only assessed for actively migrating fish.

Location1 N Mean Median Minimum Maximum Rock Island Dam Tailrace (A-B) 0 ------Left Fish Ladder (B-D) 0 ------Right Fish Ladder (B-D) 0 ------Elapsed Time at Dam (A-D) 3 5.19 2.28 1.30 11.99 Dam to Wenatchee River (D-E) 1 1.39 1.39 1.39 1.39 Dam to Rocky Reach Tailrace 4 1.36 1.33 1.16 1.61

Rocky Reach Dam Tailrace (A-B) 9 1.61 1.28 0.18 5.15 Fish Ladder (B-D) 9 2.27 1.92 0.21 5.17 Elapsed Time at Dam (A-D) 9 3.88 3.79 0.78 6.65 Dam to Entiat River (D-E) 13 7.41 7.20 3.22 13.08 Dam to Wells Tailrace 6 1.78 1.69 1.31 2.46

Wells Dam Tailrace (A-B) 10 2.17 1.53 0.57 5.75 Left Fish Ladder (B-D) 1 11.63 11.63 11.63 11.63 Right Fish Ladder (B-D) 7 7.11 5.45 5.14 12.48 Left Fish Ladder (B-C) 3 5.30 2.24 2.11 11.55 Right Fish Ladder (B-C) 7 7.08 5.41 5.13 12.48 Left Fish Ladder (A-C) 3 6.33 3.31 3.24 12.45 Right Fish Ladder (A-C) 7 9.74 8.63 5.98 15.93 Left Fish Ladder (A-D) 1 12.53 12.53 12.53 12.53 Right Fish Ladder (A-D) 7 9.76 8.66 6.02 15.96 Left Fish Ladder (C-E) 2 0.48 0.48 0.39 0.57 Right Fish Ladder (C-E) 7 0.53 0.39 0.29 1.59 Dam to Methow River (D-E) 13 1.37 0.40 0.27 6.15

1Locations are defined as: A First detection by tailrace system (300 meters downstream). B First detection inside either ladder entrance. C Last detection within the last weir prior to exit. D Last detection at either ladder exit. E First detection at tributary site.

Final Report Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 November 20, 2002 Page 31 SS/3885 Movement of Bull Trout

4.3 Tributary Selection and Residence All surviving adult bull trout tagged at each dam selected a major tributary for fall or fall-winter residence. Major tributaries selected included the Wenatchee, Entiat, and Methow systems. One bull trout entered the Okanogan River (detected at the fixed-telemetry site at R.K. 9.0), but shortly thereafter migrated downstream and entered the Methow River.

Figure 14, Figure 15, and Figure 16 show the tributaries selected by each fish released at Rock Island, Rocky Reach, and Wells dams. These figures represent major tributary selection, not specific locations within the major tributaries. Appendix A provides the locations where fish were detected during each aerial survey. What follows is a summary of residence times and locations selected by the 38 tagged bull trout within each major tributary.

4.3.1 Wenatchee River Of the 38 surviving bull trout, eight (21%) moved into the Wenatchee River basin. Of those fish, two were collected and tagged at Rock Island Dam. One of those came from a downstream release, while the other came from an upstream release. The other six fish that selected the Wenatchee basin were collected and tagged at Rocky Reach Dam and were released downstream from the dam (Table 4; Figure 14 and Figure 15).

Using aerial surveys, we were able to describe the location of seven of the eight fish in the Wenatchee system. Four fish remained within the Wenatchee River and did not move into tributaries. One resided about 1 km upstream from the mouth of the river, one near the town of Cashmere, and two in Tumwater Canyon (one near the lower end of the canyon and the other at the upstream end of the canyon). The other three fish resided in tributaries to the Wenatchee River. We found one in Peshastin Creek, one in the lower portion of Icicle Creek, and one in the lower portion of the Chiwawa River.

Bull trout that selected the Wenatchee Basin entered the system at different times. Five of the eight fish entered the Wenatchee River near the end of June 2001. The other three fish entered the Wenatchee River on 16 July, 27 August, and 21 September 2001 (Table 4). The time of egress also varied. As of the end of March 2002, five fish remained in the Wenatchee system. The other three left the system between 2 November and 11 December 2001 (Table 4).

About 75% of the adult bull trout (six fish) that selected the Wenatchee Basin were collected and tagged at Rocky Reach Dam. These fish all came from downstream releases. That is, of the 22 fish tagged and released at Rocky Reach Dam, six of the 11 that were released downstream from the dam moved into the Wenatchee system. None of the 11 fish released upstream from the dam moved into the Wenatchee system. This raises the question of whether tributary selection by these fish was an artifact of release location. At this time we cannot answer this question with any confidence. The same pattern was not observed for downstream releases at Rock Island or Wells dams (only one of the five trout released in the Wells tailrace migrated downstream and entered the Entiat River). However, if the same pattern is observed at Rocky Reach Dam during the 2002-2003 study, we will have more reason to believe that release location at Rocky Reach Dam affects tributary selection.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Final Report SS/3885 Page 32 November 20, 2002 Movement of Bull Trout

Of the three bull trout that left the Wenatchee River, two remained within the Rock Island Pool and did not pass any dams. The other fish moved downstream through Rock Island Dam and later moved back upstream through the dam. It was last detected (1 April) in the forebay of Rock Island Dam.

4.3.2 Entiat River A total of 15 adult bull trout moved into the Entiat River during the study. Of those, two were tagged at Rock Island Dam (downstream releases), 12 at Rocky Reach (four released downstream and eight upstream), and one at Wells Dam (downstream release) (Table 4; Figure 14, Figure 15, and Figure 16). All fish in the Entiat system resided either in the Mad River (eight fish) or in the mainstem Entiat River (seven fish). Those in the Mad River selected locations upstream from the Pine Flat Campground, while those in the Entiat River resided upstream from the Mad River confluence (Appendix A).

All tagged bull trout that entered the Entiat River basin did so relatively quickly after being released. The latest date of entry was 18 July, with the majority of the fish entering the system by the end of June (Table 4). The time of egress varied between fish in the Mad River and those in the Entiat River. All tagged fish that left the Entiat River did so by 11 November. Tagged fish in the Mad River remained there through winter and only one left the system by the end of March 2002.

Of the eight adult bull trout that left the Entiat Basin during the study, four moved downstream through Rocky Reach Dam and resided in the Rock Island Pool. Two other bull trout moved downstream through both Rocky Reach and Rock Island dams, but did not pass Wanapum Dam. The remaining two bull trout moved into Rocky Reach Pool and passed no dams.

4.3.3 Methow River A total of 15 tagged adult bull trout moved into the Methow River. Two of those fish were tagged and released at Rock Island Dam (upstream releases), four at Rocky Reach Dam (one downstream release and three upstream releases), and nine at Wells Dam (four downstream releases and five upstream releases) (Table 4; Figure 14, Figure 15, and Figure 16). All of the fish entered the Methow basin by 11 June. By the end of March 2002, only three tagged bull trout had left the system. Those three had moved out of the system by 18 December 2001.

Bull trout in the Methow system selected two primary areas, the mainstem Methow River (4 fish) and the Twisp River (11 fish). Two of the 11 fish in the Twisp system resided in Buttermilk Creek, a tributary to the Twisp River (Appendix A). Although a section of the Twisp River dewatered during the study, it did not affect the survival of tagged bull trout in the Twisp River basin. Of the four fish in the Methow River, three resided upstream from the Libby Creek confluence and the other resided near the confluence of Black Canyon Creek. One fish in the Methow River repeatedly moved in and out of Libby Creek, a tributary to the Methow River (Appendix A).

Of the three adult bull trout that left the Methow Basin, two remained within the Wells Pool, while the other moved downstream through Wells Dam and remained within Rocky Reach Pool.

Final Report Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 November 20, 2002 Page 33 SS/3885 Movement of Bull Trout

Table 4: Summary of tributaries selected by adult bull trout and the times that they entered and left those tributaries, 2001. Tagging Information Tributary Residence Release Code Date Entrance Exit Location Rock Island Dam Down 32 21-May-01 04-Jun-01 23-Nov-01 Entiat Basin—Mad River Down 55 19-Jun-01 28-Jun-01 31-Mar-02 Entiat Basin—Mad River Down 35 30-May-01 13-Jun-01 31-Mar-02 Wenatchee Basin—Peshastin Creek Up 48 03-Jul-01 NA NA Dead Up 4 17-May-01 30-May-01 31-Mar-02 Methow Basin—Twisp River Up 13 24-May-01 11-Jun-01 31-Mar-02 Methow Basin—Twisp River Up 36 13-Jun-01 21-Sep-01 02-Nov-01 Wenatchee Basin-Mainstem Wenatchee Rocky Reach Dam Down 29 21-May-01 06-Jun-01 31-Mar-02 Entiat Basin—Mad River Down 18 23-May-01 07-Jun-01 31-Mar-02 Entiat Basin—Mad River Down 15 25-May-01 06-Jun-01 02-Nov-01 Entiat Basin—Mainstem Entiat River Down 11 29-May-01 06-Jun-01 02-Nov-01 Entiat Basin—Mainstem Entiat River Down 54 30-May-01 11-Jun-01 31-Mar-02 Methow Basin—Libby Creek Down 8 11-Jun-01 30-Jun-01 31-Mar-02 Wenatchee Basin—Chiwawa River Down 46 18-Jun-01 23-Jun-01 11-Dec-01 Wenatchee Basin—Icicle Creek Down 5 17-May-01 30-May-01 31-Mar-02 Wenatchee Basin-Mainstem Wenatchee Down 9 07-Jun-01 27-Aug-01 16-Nov-01 Wenatchee Basin-Mainstem Wenatchee Down 25 25-Jun-01 29-Jun-01 31-Mar-02 Wenatchee Basin-Mainstem Wenatchee Down 34 10-Jul-01 16-Jul-01 31-Mar-02 Wenatchee Basin-Mainstem Wenatchee Up 45 15-Jun-01 29-Jun-01 31-Mar-02 Entiat Basin—Mad River Up 47 19-Jun-01 01-Jul-01 31-Mar-02 Entiat Basin—Mad River Up 3 15-May-01 22-May-01 31-Mar-02 Entiat Basin—Mad River Up 24 22-May-01 04-Jun-01 31-Mar-02 Entiat Basin—Mad River Up 6 29-May-01 10-Jun-01 17-Oct-01 Entiat Basin—Mainstem Entiat River Up 7 04-Jun-01 08-Jun-01 11-Nov-01 Entiat Basin—Mainstem Entiat River Up 37 06-Jun-01 11-Jun-01 09-Nov-01 Entiat Basin—Mainstem Entiat River Up 50 13-Jul-01 18-Jul-01 24-Sept-01 Entiat Basin—Mainstem Entiat River Up 20 21-May-01 30-May-01 16-Dec-01 Methow Basin—Twisp River Up 12 24-May-01 10-Jun-01 07-Oct-01 Methow Basin—Twisp River Up 14 25-May-01 02-Jun-01 31-Mar-02 Methow Basin—Twisp River Wells Dam Down 17 24-May-01 02-Jun-01 10-Aug-01 Entiat Basin—Mainstem Entiat River Down 22 29-May-01 08-Jun-01 31-Mar-02 Methow Basin—Mainstem Methow Down 26 22-May-01 01-Jun-01 16-Dec-01 Methow Basin—Twisp River Down 19 22-May-01 01-Jun-01 31-Mar-02 Methow Basin—Twisp River Down 33 22-May-01 08-Jun-01 31-Mar-02 Methow Basin—Twisp River Up 28 22-May-01 24-May-01 31-Mar-02 Methow Basin—Mainstem Methow Up 23 29-May-01 01-Jun-01 31-Mar-02 Methow Basin—Mainstem Methow Up 21 22-May-01 24-May-01 02-Nov-01 Methow Basin—Twisp River Up 31 21-May-01 27-May-01 31-Mar-02 Methow Basin Buttermilk Creek Up 16 23-May-01 25-May-01 31-Mar-02 Methow Basin Buttermilk Creek

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Final Report SS/3885 Page 34 November 20, 2002 Movement of Bull Trout

4.4 Mainstem Habitat Use Using boat surveys, we described the general habitat used by tagged adult bull trout as they moved through Rock Island and Rocky Reach reservoirs. We conducted bi-weekly boat surveys during the period June 2001 to March 2002. During these surveys, aerial antennas detected the general location of tagged fish, while underwater antennas pinpointed more specific positions of tagged fish in the reservoirs. In addition, we described the extent that radio-tagged bull trout used the Wells Hatchery outfall and the mainstem Columbia River downstream from Rock Island Dam. The purpose of this work was to determine if bull trout used the Wells Hatchery outfall as a temperature refugia, and to assess the extent that bull trout used Wanapum and Priest Rapids reservoirs. The following sections summarize our findings.

4.4.1 Rock Island Reservoir Between the period of 1 June 2001 and 28 March 2002, we conducted a total of 18 boat surveys within Rock Island Reservoir. Fifteen of these surveys were conducted during daylight hours and three were initiated one hour after sunset or later. The purpose of nighttime surveys was to detect fish that may have avoided detection during the day by residing in deep water but moved into shallower water at night.

We pinpointed the location of seven different bull trout within the Rock Island Reservoir during the study period (Appendix A). We detected many of these fish on more than one survey. Three of the seven bull trout were detected on or before 3 August and therefore their habitat use represented locations selected by the fish as they moved toward tributary streams. On average, these fish occurred in 5.5 m of water approximately 90 m from shore. All three fish were located over a relatively flat river bottom in areas of relatively high water velocities.

We monitored the locations of five adult bull trout in the reservoir after 14 December. These detections occurred after the bull trout had moved out of major tributaries and therefore represented habitat selection while the fish resided within the Rock Island Reservoir. For these five fish, we detected four on more than one survey and one fish during seven surveys over a three-month period. These fish occupied an average depth of 5.3 m and occurred on average about 40 m from shore. These fish resided within an area of about 50 m in diameter. We observed one fish on six consecutive surveys within about a 5-m-diameter area. The area in which fish resided had a fairly flat bottom with little structure (based on depth-sounder observations). Water velocities at fish locations were generally slow but typical of velocities in the reservoir.

4.4.2 Rocky Reach Reservoir During the 1 June 2001 to 28 March 2002 survey period, we conducted 17 boat surveys within Rocky Reach Reservoir (three of these surveys were conducted at night). One survey was cancelled because of equipment malfunction and another was shortened because inclement weather prevented us from surveying portions of the reservoir upstream from the Entiat River confluence. During the surveys we located nine bull trout, four before they entered tributaries and five after they left tributaries (Appendix A).

The four fish detected before they entered tributaries occupied fairly deep water (mean, 12.6 m) about 110 m from shore. The five fish that left tributaries occurred in waters that averaged 7.8 m deep and were stationed about 40 m from shore. Only one of these fish was detected more than

Final Report Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 November 20, 2002 Page 35 SS/3885 Movement of Bull Trout once. Two of the fish ended up in Rock Island Reservoir. One fish ventured into the Chelan River, then returned to the reservoir and resided there for about four months.

4.4.3 Migrant versus Resident Fish There was a difference in the habitat selected by bull trout moving through the Rocky Reach and Rock Island reservoirs versus those that established residence in the reservoirs. Bull trout migrating to or from tributaries tended to occupy deeper water than those trout that resided in the reservoir. Migrant bull trout selected mean depths of 8.3 m, while resident bull trout selected mean depths of 6.2 m. The average distance from shore for the two groups of fish also differed. The distance from shore for migrating fish was about 95 m, while resident bull trout were on average 40 m from shore. Water velocities occupied by the two groups also differed, with migrants occupying areas with higher velocities than resident forms.

These results represent only the fish that we could detect. We know that other tagged bull trout occurred within the reservoirs (based on detection at fix-telemetry sites), but we could not find them during boat or aerial surveys. We believe that these fish were at depths that precluded detection with conventional telemetry equipment and therefore the habitat that they selected would differ from the habitat selected by detectable fish.

4.4.4 Wells Hatchery Outfall Another objective of this study was to assess the extent that bull trout used the Wells Hatchery outfall. To address this issue, we deployed an underwater telemetry system within the outfall channel downstream from the ladder system. Of the 39 bull trout that were radio-tagged throughout the mid-Columbia River, a total of 11 (28.2%) were detected within the Wells Hatchery outfall (Table 5). However, of the trout that were in the vicinity of Wells Dam and the outfall (12 tagged bull trout), all but one (92%) entered the hatchery outfall. Of those that entered the outfall, two were tagged at Rock Island, four at Rocky Reach, and five at Wells Dam.

The five fish tagged at Wells Dam that entered the outfall were all released downstream from the dam. Thus, their detection in the outfall was not surprising given that they were released about 20 m downstream from the underwater telemetry system. However, all five fish were detected multiple times, and one was detected on 13 separate occasions (Table 5). On average, fish were detected 6.6 times by the outfall underwater telemetry system with a total of 22.3 minutes per detection. The total elapsed time for fish detected at the outfall (i.e., the period of time between the first detection and the last detection for the first and last visits, respectively) averaged 5.6 days, with a range of several minutes to 15.4 days.

Bull trout were more likely to use the outfall during daylight hours than at night. Of the 73 detections for the 11 tagged bull trout that occurred in the outfall, 58 occurred during periods of daylight (0500-2100 hours), with an average of 3.6 detections per daylight hour. During periods of darkness, we observed on average 1.9 detections per hour (Figure 17).

It is unclear why there was a high occurrence of adult bull trout in the hatchery outflow. Possible reasons include a temperature refuge, opportunistic feeding opportunities, or simple exploratory behavior. With regard to the outflow providing bull trout with a temperature refuge, the hatchery operates September through May primarily on well water that is a constant 11.1°C (there is some

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Final Report SS/3885 Page 36 November 20, 2002 Movement of Bull Trout use of Columbia River water at this facility). After May, the mainstem Columbia River is the primary water source for the hatchery (supplemented with about 4 cfs of well water). We would expect that the outflow provided a temperature refuge during late summer and early fall, but we did not find bull trout in the outflow at that time. We found them in the outflow in May and early June. In May and June we would not expect a large temperature difference between the outflow and the Columbia River. Indeed, water temperatures at that time in the Columbia River (measured near Bridgeport) ranged from 11.0 and 12.5°C, but more typically from 11.25 and 11.75°C. These temperatures are within the thermal optima for adult bull trout (EPA 2001).

It is possible that the bull trout frequented the outfall in search of prey. Typical operation at the hatchery is to volitionally release yearling chinook smolts between 15 and 30 April. These smolts migrate downstream through the ladder system and then enter the Columbia River. Although hatchery releases occurred before we detected bull trout in the outflow, large numbers of smolts were routinely observed during the period when the bull trout frequented the outflow (Shane Bickford, DPUD, personal communication). Given that bull trout feed opportunistically (Goetz 1989), it is likely that the tagged bull trout were taking advantage of the large concentration of juvenile salmonids within the outfall and ladder system.

4.4.5 Wanapum and Priest Rapids Reservoirs During the study no tagged bull trout passed through Wanapum or Priest Rapids dams. We detected only three bull trout that moved downstream of Rock Island Dam after they left tributaries. We detected two fish within the tailrace of Rock Island Dam on 18 November 2001. One of those was later (28 February 2002) detected about 11 km upstream from Wanapum Dam near the east shore. The other re-ascended the center fishway and was later detected (1 April 2002) in the forebay of Rock Island Dam. The third fish was detected in the Rock Island tailrace on 27 March 2002. This fish was orientated near the east shore in relatively deep water.

Final Report Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 November 20, 2002 Page 37 SS/3885 Movement of Bull Trout

Table 5: Number of visits and length of time that eleven bull trout were detected within the Wells Hatchery outfall. The mean, minimum, maximum and total times are in hours and the elapsed time is in days. The elapsed time is defined as the period of time between the first and last detections at this location. Release Number Time Location Code of Visits Mean Min Max Total Elapsed Rock Island Dam Up 4 1 0:04:35 ------0:04:35 0.0 Up 13 15 0:54:34 0:00:12 12:03:18 13:38:25 8.6

Rocky Reach Dam Down 54 6 0:02:45 0:00:31 0:04:58 0:16:31 4.8 Up 12 13 0:09:41 0:01:14 0:22:23 2:05:51 10.3 Up 20 1 0:11:32 ------0:11:32 0.0 Up 47 4 0:02:11 0:00:18 0:04:34 0:08:43 2.4

Wells Dam Down 17 2 0:13:39 0:01:02 0:26:15 0:27:17 0.4 Down 19 8 0:29:43 0:00:51 1:59:32 3:57:43 3.6 Down 22 3 1:40:37 0:02:33 4:55:35 5:01:51 8.5 Down 26 13 0:03:21 0:00:30 0:13:47 0:43:38 7.8 Down 33 7 0:04:32 0:00:51 0:13:23 0:31:41 15.4

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Final Report SS/3885 Page 38 November 20, 2002 Movement of Bull Trout

Figure 14: Mid-Columbia River tributaries selected by bull trout after they were released upstream and downstream from Rock Island Dam, 2001. Final destination for radio-tagged bull trout within each tributary is noted in Table 5.

Final Report Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 November 20, 2002 Page 39 SS/3885 Movement of Bull Trout

Figure 15: Mid-Columbia River tributaries selected by bull trout after they were released upstream and downstream from Rocky Reach Dam, 2001. Final destination for radio-tagged bull trout within each tributary is noted in Table 5.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Final Report SS/3885 Page 40 November 20, 2002 Movement of Bull Trout

Figure 16: Mid-Columbia River tributaries selected by bull trout after they were released upstream and downstream from Wells Dam, 2001. Final destination for radio-tagged bull trout within each tributary is noted in Table 5.

Final Report Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 November 20, 2002 Page 41 SS/3885 Movement of Bull Trout

Time of Entrance into the Wells Hatchery Outfall

6 Frequency

0 123456789101112131415161718192021222324 Time (24 hrs)

Figure 17: Diel pattern for 11 radio-tagged bull trout detected at the Wells hatchery outfall. There were 73 visits to the hatchery outfall, but most (58) occurred between 0500-2100 hrs.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Final Report SS/3885 Page 42 November 20, 2002 Movement of Bull Trout

SECTION 5: CONCLUSIONS

Based on the results from the 2001-2002 study, we offer the following tentative conclusions.

1. We successfully tagged 39 adult bull trout with radio tags in 2001. Only one of those died during the study. There is no evidence that hydroelectric operations killed the fish. 2. Based on data collected in 2001-2002, operations of hydroelectric facilities on the mid- Columbia River did not negatively affect the survival of adult bull trout. No adult bull trout were killed during upstream or downstream passage through the mid-Columbia dams. However, the dams experienced fairly homogenous operating conditions during the study. 3. Although hydroelectric operations did not appear to affect the survival of adult bull trout, the presence of dams may have slowed migration rates. On average, it took bull trout longer to pass dams than it did for them to move through reservoirs. In general, bull trout spent more time passing Wells Dam than Rocky Reach or Rock Island dams. 4. No tagged bull trout fell back into the tailraces of any dams. However, 2001 was a low- flow year and there was no spill at Rocky Reach Dam. 5. Bull trout entered tributaries shortly after release. They selected the Wenatchee, Entiat, and Methow systems. No bull trout selected the Okanogan system (one trout moved into the Okanogan, but left shortly thereafter and moved into the Methow system). Most entered mainstem tributaries by mid-June. 6. A large fraction (92%) of the bull trout detected within the Wells Dam tailrace entered the hatchery outfall. Because there was little difference in temperature between the outfall and the mainstem Columbia River, it is unlikely that bull trout used the outfall as a temperature refuge. Instead, they may have used the outfall to increase feeding opportunities. 7. Only three bull trout moved downstream of Rock Island Dam after an extended stay in tributaries. Two of these fish remained within the tailrace area and the other moved to the Quilomene area. No tagged bull trout passed Wanapum or Priest Rapids dams.

Final Report Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 November 20, 2002 Page 43 SS/3885

Movement of Bull Trout

SECTION 6: ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Chelan, Douglas, and Grant County PUDs funded this study. We thank Scott Kreiter (Chelan PUD), Shane Bickford (Douglas PUD), and Tom Dresser (Grant PUD) for providing valuable assistance in the development and implementation of this study. We especially thank Scott for assuming the role as overall project coordinator for the study. We thank Lowell Rainey, Chris Nystrom, and Jim Smith for their assistance in transporting tagged fish, and Thad Mosey and Robert McDonald for their help in securing equipment. The mechanics at Chelan PUD assisted in the construction of capture facilities. Charlie Snow, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, coordinated the collection of bull trout at Wells Dam. We appreciate the Douglas PUD operators, who assisted with trapping and tagging activities at Wells Dam. We appreciate the help of Grant PUD fisheries technicians, who conducted mobile surveys within Wanapum pool. We thank Karl English, Bryan Nass, and Cezary Sliwinski of LGL limited for processing telemetry data and LGL field personnel for their assistance in data collection at Priest Rapids, Wanapum, and Wells dams. Finally, we thank Jeff Reeves, Nick Arness, and Don Gadberry of BioAnalysts for their dedication in trapping and monitoring of bull trout.

Final Report Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 November 20, 2002 Page 45 SS/3885

Movement of Bull Trout

SECTION 7: REFERENCES

Adams, N. S., D. W. Rondorf, S. D. Evans, J. E. Kelly, and R. W. Perry. 1998. Effects of surgically and gastrically implanted radio transmitters on swimming performance and predator avoidance of juvenile chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha). Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 55:781-787.

English, K. K., T. C. Nelson, C. Sliwinski, and J. R. Stevenson. 1998. Assessment of passage facilities for adult sockeye, chinook, and steelhead at Rock Island and Rocky Reach dams on the mid-Columbia River in 1997. Report to Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County, Wenatchee, WA.

English, K. K., C. Sliwinski, B. Nass, and J. R. Stevenson. 2001. Assessment of passage facilities for adult steelhead at Priest Rapids, Wanapum, Rock Island, Rocky Reach, and Wells dams on the mid-Columbia River in 1999. Report to Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County, Wenatchee, WA.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2001. Draft EPA Region 10 guidance for state and tribal temperature water quality standards. Public review draft, Seattle, WA.

Goetz, F. 1989. Biology of the bull trout, “Salvelinus confluentus,” a literature review. Willamette National Forest, Eugene, OR.

Mullan, J. W., K. R. Williams, G. Rhodus, T. W. Hillman, and J. D. McIntyre. 1992. Production and habitat of salmonids in Mid-Columbia River tributary streams. United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Monograph I.

Stevenson, J. R., J. R. Skalski, J. Lady, R. Townsend, A. E. Giorgi, and R. McDonald. 2000. A pilot study assessing the feasibility of using radiotelemetry and PIT-tag techniques to estimate project, pool and dam survival of steelhead smolts at Rocky Reach and Rock Island dams, 1999. Report to Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County, Wenatchee, WA.

Skalski, J. R., J. R. Stevenson, J. Lady, R. Townsend, A. E. Giorgi, M. Miller, and K. English. In prep. An assessment of project, pool, and dam survival for chinook and steelhead smolts at Rocky Reach and Rock Island dams using radiotelemetry and PIT-tag techniques, 2000. Report to Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County, Wenatchee, WA.

Summerfelt, R. C. and L. S. Smith. 1990. Anesthesia, surgery and related techniques. Pages 213- 272 In: C. B. Shreck and P. B. Moyle, editors. Methods of fish biology. American Fisheries Society Symposium 7, Bethesda, Maryland.

Wedemeyer, G. 1970. Stress of anesthesia with MS 222 and benzocaine in rainbow trout (Salmon gairdneri). Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 27:909-914.

Winter, J. D. 1983. Underwater biotelemetry. Pages 371-395 In: L. A. Nielsen and D. L. Johnson, editors. Fisheries techniques. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, Maryland.