DOCSLIB.ORG

Aspects of Sacramento Pikeminnow Biology in Nearshore Habitats of the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta, California

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Aspects of Sacramento Pikeminnow Biology in Nearshore Habitats of the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta, California Western North American Naturalist Volume 66 Number 1 Article 9 2-15-2006 Aspects of Sacramento pikeminnow biology in nearshore habitats of the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta, California Matthew L. Nobriga California Department of Water Resources, Aquatic Ecology Section, Sacramento, California Frederick Feyrer California Department of Water Resources, Aquatic Ecology Section, Sacramento, California Randall D. Baxter California Department of Fish and Game, Central Valley/Bay-Delta Branch, Stockton, California Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/wnan Recommended Citation Nobriga, Matthew L.; Feyrer, Frederick; and Baxter, Randall D. (2006) "Aspects of Sacramento pikeminnow biology in nearshore habitats of the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta, California," Western North American Naturalist: Vol. 66 : No. 1 , Article 9. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/wnan/vol66/iss1/9 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Western North American Naturalist Publications at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Western North American Naturalist by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Western North American Naturalist 66(1), © 2006, pp. 106–114 ASPECTS OF SACRAMENTO PIKEMINNOW BIOLOGY IN NEARSHORE HABITATS OF THE SACRAMENTO–SAN JOAQUIN DELTA, CALIFORNIA Matthew L. Nobriga1, Frederick Feyrer1, and Randall D. Baxter2 ABSTRACT.—We documented distribution, relative abundance, diet composition, and body condition of Sacramento pikeminnow Ptychocheilus grandis during 2001 and 2003 at 5 sites in the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta, California. Sacramento pikeminnow densities in nearshore habitats were higher in 2003 than 2001. In both years, spatial distribu- tion of beach seine densities was similar. There were no significant differences in density among sampling sites except for the southernmost site where the catch was near zero. Based on rotary screw-trap data from a 6th site, we found rela- tive abundance of Sacramento pikeminnow entering the Delta via an artificial floodplain was positively correlated with flow. Most individuals collected using all 3 gear types were age 1 or older, and appeared to grow quickly based on data from previous studies. Sacramento pikeminnow had diverse diets composed of freshwater and estuarine invertebrate and fish taxa. Incidence of piscivory was only 2% of the diet of individuals <150 mm, but increased to 50% for fish over 150 mm. No salmonids were observed in foregut contents during the study. In both years body condition declined abruptly in July. Our results suggest Sacramento pikeminnow are more common in the turbid, tidal freshwater habitats of the Delta than was previously recognized. Stream flows may play an important role in moving juvenile Sacramento pikeminnow into the Delta from upstream areas. Similar to northern pikeminnow P. oregonensis, but in seeming con- trast to endangered Colorado pikeminnow P. lucius, the present study showed that Sacramento pikeminnow can be suc- cessful in altered habitats. Key words: Sacramento pikeminnow, Ptychocheilus grandis, Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta, habitat use, diet compo- sition, condition factor, Cyprinidae. The pikeminnows (Genus: Ptychocheilus) are icek 1996, Brown and Ford 2002, Moyle et al. unique among North American cyprinids due 2003). Life history data for Ptychocheilus spp. to their large size and ecological roles as apex in tidal systems have not been documented in predators (Carney and Page 1990). Two Ptycho- detail, though pikeminnow species are known cheilus spp. are native to California. The Col- to occur in tidal low-salinity and fresh-river orado pikeminnow P. lucius is endangered and reaches (Taft and Murphy 1950, Turner 1966, presumed extinct within California waters Bottom and Jones 1990, Matern et al. 2002). (Moyle 2002). In contrast, the Sacramento pike- Perhaps due to limited documentation of catches minnow P. grandis is common, widely distrib- from tidal habitats, Sacramento pikeminnow uted, and even considered a pest in some loca- has been reported as uncommon in the larg- tions. The natural distribution of Sacramento est tidal freshwater system within its range, pikeminnow includes middle and low elevation the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta, hereafter streams of the Sacramento–San Joaquin River “Delta” (Moyle 2002). system, the Clear Lake basin, and the Pajaro- During 2001 and 2003, we studied fish use of Salinas and Russian River systems (Taft and nearshore habitats in the Delta (Fig. 1). Life his- Murphy 1950). In addition, Sacramento pike- tory data for Sacramento pikeminnow in the minnow have been introduced into the Eel Delta are lacking. Here, we address 4 basic life River, tributaries of Morro Bay, and some south- history questions regarding use of this tidal ern California reservoirs (Moyle 2002). Most freshwater habitat: (1) When and where do field studies of Sacramento pikeminnow, or Sacramento pikeminnow occur, and how rela- the fish communities of which they were part, tively abundant are they? (2) Does stream inflow have examined their ecology in lotic habitats influence use of the Delta as rearing habitat? or reservoirs (e.g., Vondracek et al. 1989, Brown (3) What types of prey are eaten? (4) Does 1990, Brown and Moyle 1991, Merz and Van- body condition vary spatially or temporally? 1California Department of Water Resources, Aquatic Ecology Section, 3251 S Street, Sacramento, CA 95816. 2California Department of Fish and Game, Central Valley/Bay-Delta Branch, 4001 North Wilson Way, Stockton, CA 95205. 106 2006] SACRAMENTO PIKEMINNOW IN TIDAL HABITATS 107 Fig. 1. The Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta showing sampling site locations. 1 = Yolo Bypass rotary screw-trap site, 2 = Liberty Island, 3 = Sacramento River, 4 = Sherman Lake, 5 = San Joaquin River, 6 = Mildred Island. This information provides new insight into the km2 of potential habitat for Sacramento pike- life history of Sacramento pikeminnow, its role minnow and other fishes. It receives freshwater as a predator of special-status fishes such as runoff from approximately 100,000 km2 (40%) Chinook salmon Oncorhyncus tschawytscha, of California’s surface area. Most natural runoff and the restoration needs of native fishes in occurs during winter and spring (December– the Delta and its watershed. May), but a significant proportion of natural runoff is captured in numerous reservoirs MATERIALS AND METHODS located throughout the Sacramento–San Joa- quin watershed. Reservoir releases from the Study Area Sacramento River maintain year-round fresh- The Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta (Fig. 1) water conditions in the Delta. For instance, is the landward limit of the San Francisco data from the California Department of Fish Estuary and a water supply nexus for much of and Game indicate that, during this study, spe- California’s population (Arthur et al. 1996). The cific conductance did not exceed 4499 µs ⋅ Delta comprises an extensive network of tidally- cm–1 (approximately 2% oceanic salinity) at influenced channels that provide nearly 1100 Sherman Lake, our most seaward site. The 108 WESTERN NORTH AMERICAN NATURALIST [Volume 66 maintenance of freshwater conditions year- Deeper water near the beach seine sites round supports regional agriculture and fresh- was sampled using a gill net (60 × 2.4 m with water exports for agriculture and urban users randomized graded-mesh panels of 51–102- to the south (Arthur et al. 1996, Kimmerer mm stretch mesh). The gill net was set parallel 2002). A highly variable average of 4.5 billion to shore for 20–30 minutes, 2–6 times per m3 ⋅ yr–1 of fresh water is exported from the visit, in water approximately 2–4 m deep. We southern Delta (~17% of annual outflow to the used a parallel-to-shore deployment to mini- estuary; Kimmerer 2002). Water exports sub- mize incidental captures of offshore-oriented stantially affect estuarine hydrodynamics, water species of concern (salmonids and sturgeon) quality, and fisheries (Arthur et al. 1996, Ben- and short deployment times to minimize mor- nett and Moyle 1996, Kimmerer 2002). tality of all species. Most sampling was con- We sampled fishes monthly (March–October ducted around sunset to coincide with active 2001 and 2003) at 5 nearshore sites (Fig. 1). foraging periods of piscivores including Sacra- These sampling sites were chosen for logisti- mento pikeminnow (Brown 1990). cal reasons; all contained substantial amounts To determine whether river flow influenced of shoreline that could be efficiently sampled the dispersal of Sacramento pikeminnow into with a beach seine. The sampling sites in- our study area, we examined longer-term data cluded shoals <1.5 m deep located along river from rotary screw-trap sampling in the Yolo channel edges or along levees within former Bypass. The rotary screw-trap sampling meth- agricultural “islands” that were subsequently ods were described by Sommer et al. (2004). flooded and not reclaimed (see Grimaldo et al. We used linear regression to test for an effect 2004 for a detailed description of the latter of log-transformed Yolo Bypass flow (USGS habitat type). Fishes were collected using a gauge at Woodland, CA) on Sacramento pike- minnow catch per unit effort (fish ⋅ 24 hr–1) in beach seine and a gill net. All Sacramento pike- the Yolo Bypass Toe Drain (Fig. 1). Both vari- minnow were counted and measured for fork ables were calculated for the period 1 January length (mm). Two persons, transported in a through 30 June 1998–2004. small, shallow draft boat, entered the water We subsampled up to 10 Sacramento pike- offshore of a sample area and seined fish using × minnow per gear per sampling day for exami- a 30 1.8-m (3.2-mm mesh) beach seine. Each nation of body condition and feeding habits. month, 2–8 seine hauls were made per site. Whole fish up to 306 mm were preserved in One site was sampled per day, so 5 days were 10% formaldehyde. In the laboratory they were needed to complete each month’s sampling. remeasured. Preservation times varied from We collected samples during daylight, usually approximately 2 weeks to 4 months.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2008 Annual Report
    Document ID #P113359 Report covers work performed under BPA contract #26763 Report was completed under BPA contract #34772 REPORT ON THE PREDATION INDEX, PREDATOR CONTROL FISHERIES, AND PROGRAM EVALUATION FOR THE COLUMBIA RIVER BASIN EXPERIMENTAL NORTHERN PIKEMINNOW MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2008 ANNUAL REPORT Prepared by: Russell Porter Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission In Cooperation with: Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife U.S. Department of Agriculture Prepared for: U.S. Department of Energy Bonneville Power Administration Environment, Fish and Wildlife P.O. Box 3621 Portland, OR 97208-3621 Project Number 199007700 Contract Number 00026763 Table of Contents Executive Summary 5 Report A – Sport Reward Fishery in the Columbia and Snake Rivers 10 Abstract 11 Introduction 12 Methods of Operation 13 Fishery Operation 13 Boundaries and Season 13 Registration Stations 14 Reward System 14 Angler Sampling 15 Returning Anglers 16 Non-Returning Anglers 16 Northern Pikeminnow Handling Procedures 17 Biological Sampling 17 PIT Tag Detection 17 Northern Pikeminnow Processing 18 Results and Discussion 18 Northern Pikeminnow Harvest 18 Harvest by Week 19 Harvest by Fishing Location 20 Harvest by Registration Station 21 Harvest by Species/Incidental Catch 22 Angler Effort 24 Effort by Week 25 Effort by Fishing Location 27 Effort by Registration Station 27 Catch Per Angler Day (CPUE) 28 CPUE by Week 29 CPUE by Fishing Location 30 CPUE by Registration Station 30 Angler Totals 31 Tag Recovery 34 Northern
    [Show full text]
  • Edna Assay Development
    Environmental DNA assays available for species detection via qPCR analysis at the U.S.D.A Forest Service National Genomics Center for Wildlife and Fish Conservation (NGC). Asterisks indicate the assay was designed at the NGC. This list was last updated in June 2021 and is subject to change. Please contact [email protected] with questions. Family Species Common name Ready for use? Mustelidae Martes americana, Martes caurina American and Pacific marten* Y Castoridae Castor canadensis American beaver Y Ranidae Lithobates catesbeianus American bullfrog Y Cinclidae Cinclus mexicanus American dipper* N Anguillidae Anguilla rostrata American eel Y Soricidae Sorex palustris American water shrew* N Salmonidae Oncorhynchus clarkii ssp Any cutthroat trout* N Petromyzontidae Lampetra spp. Any Lampetra* Y Salmonidae Salmonidae Any salmonid* Y Cottidae Cottidae Any sculpin* Y Salmonidae Thymallus arcticus Arctic grayling* Y Cyrenidae Corbicula fluminea Asian clam* N Salmonidae Salmo salar Atlantic Salmon Y Lymnaeidae Radix auricularia Big-eared radix* N Cyprinidae Mylopharyngodon piceus Black carp N Ictaluridae Ameiurus melas Black Bullhead* N Catostomidae Cycleptus elongatus Blue Sucker* N Cichlidae Oreochromis aureus Blue tilapia* N Catostomidae Catostomus discobolus Bluehead sucker* N Catostomidae Catostomus virescens Bluehead sucker* Y Felidae Lynx rufus Bobcat* Y Hylidae Pseudocris maculata Boreal chorus frog N Hydrocharitaceae Egeria densa Brazilian elodea N Salmonidae Salvelinus fontinalis Brook trout* Y Colubridae Boiga irregularis Brown tree snake*
    [Show full text]
  • Development of a System-Wide Predator Control Program: Northern Squawfish Management Program
    Development of a System-wide Predator Control Program Northern Squawfish Management Program - Implementation Annual Report 1997 October 1998 DOE/BP-24514-8 This Document should be cited as follows: Young, Franklin, "Development of a System-wide Predator Control Program; Northern Squawfish Management Program - Implementation", 1997 Annual Report, Project No. 199007700, 100 electronic pages, (BPA Report DOE/BP-24514-8) Bonneville Power Administration P.O. Box 3621 Portland, OR 97208 This report was funded by the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), U.S. Department of Energy, as part of BPA's program to protect, mitigate, and enhance fish and wildlife affected by the development and operation of hydroelectric facilities on the Columbia River and its tributaries. The views in this report are the author's and do not necessarily represent the views of BPA. DEVELOPMENT OF A SYSTEMWIDE PREDATOR CONTROL PROGRAM: STEPWISE IMPLEMENTATION OF A PREDATION INDEX, PREDATOR CONTROL FISHERIES, AND EVALUATION PLAN IN THE COLUMBIA RIVER BASIN SECTION I: IMPLEMENTATION 1997 ANNUAL REPORT Prepared by: Franklin R. Young Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Authority In Cooperation With Nez Perce Tribe of Idaho Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission Columbia River Inter-tribal Fish Commission Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Indian Reservation Prepared
    [Show full text]
  • Rough Fish”: Paradigm Shift in the Conservation of Native Fishes Andrew L
    PERSPECTIVE Goodbye to “Rough Fish”: Paradigm Shift in the Conservation of Native Fishes Andrew L. Rypel | University of California, Davis, Department of Wildlife, Fish and Conservation Biology, 1 Shields Ave, Davis, CA 95616 | University of California, Davis, Center for Watershed Sciences, Davis, CA. E-mail: [email protected] Parsa Saffarinia | University of California, Davis, Department of Wildlife, Fish and Conservation Biology, Davis, CA Caryn C. Vaughn | University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma Biological Survey and Department of Biology, Norman, OK Larry Nesper | University of Wisconsin–Madison, Department of Anthropology, Madison, WI Katherine O’Reilly | University of Notre Dame, Department of Biological Sciences, Notre Dame, IN Christine A. Parisek | University of California, Davis, Center for Watershed Sciences, Davis, CA | University of California, Davis, Department of Wildlife, Fish and Conservation Biology, Davis, CA | The Nature Conservancy, Science Communications, Boise, ID Peter B. Moyle | University of California, Davis, Center for Watershed Sciences, Davis, CA Nann A. Fangue | University of California, Davis, Department of Wildlife, Fish and Conservation Biology, Davis, CA Miranda Bell- Tilcock | University of California, Davis, Center for Watershed Sciences, Davis, CA David Ayers | University of California, Davis, Center for Watershed Sciences, Davis, CA | University of California, Davis, Department of Wildlife, Fish and Conservation Biology, Davis, CA Solomon R. David | Nicholls State University, Department of Biological Sciences, Thibodaux, LA While sometimes difficult to admit, perspectives of European and white males have overwhelmingly dominated fisheries science and management in the USA. This dynamic is exemplified by bias against “rough fish”— a pejorative ascribing low- to- zero value for countless native fishes. One product of this bias is that biologists have ironically worked against conservation of diverse fishes for over a century, and these problems persist today.
    [Show full text]
  • Burner, L. C, J. A. North, R. A. Farr, and T. A. Rien. 2000
    WHITE STURGEON MITIGATIONMITIGATION AND RESTORATIORESTORATIONN IN THE COLUMBIA ANDAND SNAKE RIVERS UPSTREAUPSTREAMM FROM BONNEVILLE DADAM.M. ANNUAL PROGRESS REPORT APRIL 1998 - MARCH 1999 Edited by: David L. Ward Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife In Cooperation With: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife U.S. Geological Survey Biological Resources Division U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission University of Idaho Prepared For: U.S. Department of Energy Bonneville Power Administration Environment, Fish and Wildlife P.O. Box 3621 Portland, OR 97208-3621 Project Number 86-50 Contract Number DE-AI79-86BP63584 CONTENTS Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY by David L. Ward 3 REPORT A. Evaluate the success of developing and implementing a management plan for enhancing production of white sturgeon in reservoirs between Bonneville and McNary dams. by Lisa C. Burner, John A. North, Ruth A. Farr, and Thomas A. Rien 6 REPORT B. Evaluate the success of developing and implementing a management plan for white sturgeon in reservoirs between Bonneville and McNary dams in enhancing production. Describe the life history and population dynamics of subadult and adult white sturgeon upstream of McNary Dam and downstream from Bonneville Dam. by John D. DeVore, Brad W. James, Dennis R. Gilliland, and Brad J. Cady 41 REPORT C. Describe reproduction and early life history characteristics of white sturgeon populations in the Columbia River between Bonneville and Priest Rapids dams. Define habitat requirements for spawning and rearing white sturgeons and quantify the extent of habitat available in the Columbia River between Bonneville and Priest Rapids dams. by Kevin M. Kappenman, Darren G.
    [Show full text]
  • Stepwise Implementation of a Predation Index, Predator Control Fisheries, and Evaluation Plan in the Columbia River Basin
    DEVELOPMENT OF A SYSTEM-WIDE PREDATOR CONTROL PROGRAM: STEPWISE IMPLEMENTATION OF A PREDATION INDEX, PREDATOR CONTROL FISHERIES, AND EVALUATION PLAN IN THE COLUMBIA RIVER BASIN 2004 ANNUAL REPORT Prepared by: Russell Porter Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission In Cooperation with: Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Prepared for: U.S. Department of Energy Bonneville Power Administration Environment, Fish and Wildlife P.O. Box 3621 Portland, OR 97208-3621 Project Number 199007700 Contract Number 00004477 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4 REPORT A 9 Acknowledgments 10 Abstract . 11 Introduction 12 Methods Of Operation 13 Fishery Operation Boundaries And Season. 13 Registration Stations 13 Reward System . 14 Angler Sampling 15 Returning Anglers . 16 Non Returning Anglers . 16 Northern Pikeminnow Handling Procedures Biological Sampling 16 Pit Tag Detection 17 Northern Pikeminnow Processing. 17 Results And Discussion 18 Northern Pikeminnow Harvest . 18 Incidental Catch/Harvest By Species 21 Returning Anglers. 21 Non-Returning Angler Catch And Harvest Estimates. 22 Fork Length Data. 24 Angler Effort. 24 Catch Per Angler Day . 27 Angler Totals. 30 Tag Recovery. 32 Summary 35 Recommendations For The 2005 Season. 36 References 37 Appendices. 40 i REPORT B 42 Introduction 43 Catch And Payments 43 Tagged Fish Payments 43 Accounting 43 2003 Sport Reward Payments Summary 44 REPORT C 45 Summary 46 Introduction 49 Methods 49 Fishery Evaluation, Predation Estimates, Tag Loss, And Age Validation 49 Field And Laboratory Procedures 49 Data Analysis 51 Biological Evaluation 54 Field And Laboratory Procedures 54 Data Analysis 55 Results 57 Fishery Evaluation, Predation Estimates, Tag Loss, And Age Validation 57 Biological Evaluation 65 Discussion 82 Acknowledgments 95 References 96 Appendix A.
    [Show full text]
  • Molecular Systematics of Western North American Cyprinids (Cypriniformes: Cyprinidae)
    Zootaxa 3586: 281–303 (2012) ISSN 1175-5326 (print edition) www.mapress.com/zootaxa/ ZOOTAXA Copyright © 2012 · Magnolia Press Article ISSN 1175-5334 (online edition) urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:0EFA9728-D4BB-467E-A0E0-0DA89E7E30AD Molecular systematics of western North American cyprinids (Cypriniformes: Cyprinidae) SUSANA SCHÖNHUTH 1, DENNIS K. SHIOZAWA 2, THOMAS E. DOWLING 3 & RICHARD L. MAYDEN 1 1 Department of Biology, Saint Louis University, 3507 Laclede Avenue, St. Louis, MO 63103, USA. E-mail S.S: [email protected] ; E-mail RLM: [email protected] 2 Department of Biology and Curator of Fishes, Monte L. Bean Life Science Museum, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT 84602, USA. E-mail: [email protected] 3 School of Life Sciences, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287-4501, USA. E-mail: [email protected] Abstract The phylogenetic or evolutionary relationships of species of Cypriniformes, as well as their classification, is in a era of flux. For the first time ever, the Order, and constituent Families are being examined for relationships within a phylogenetic context. Relevant findings as to sister-group relationships are largely being inferred from analyses of both mitochondrial and nuclear DNA sequences. Like the vast majority of Cypriniformes, due to an overall lack of any phylogenetic investigation of these fishes since Hennig’s transformation of the discipline, changes in hypotheses of relationships and a natural classification of the species should not be of surprise to anyone. Basically, for most taxa no properly supported phylogenetic hypothesis has ever been done; and this includes relationships with reasonable taxon and character sampling of even families and subfamilies.
    [Show full text]
  • PREHISTORIC FORAGING PATTERNS at CA-SAC-47 SACRAMENTO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA a Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the Department Of
    PREHISTORIC FORAGING PATTERNS AT CA-SAC-47 SACRAMENTO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the Department of Anthropology California State University, Sacramento Submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS in Anthropology by Justin Blake Cairns SUMMER 2016 © 2016 Justin Blake Cairns ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii PREHISTORIC FORAGING PATTERNS AT CA-SAC-47 SACRAMENTO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA A Thesis by Justin Blake Cairns Approved by: ________________________________, Committee Chair Mark E. Basgall, Ph.D. ________________________________, Second Reader Jacob L. Fisher, Ph.D. ____________________________ Date iii Student: Justin Blake Cairns I certify that this student has met the requirements for format contained in the University format manual, and that this thesis is suitable for shelving in the Library and credit is to be awarded for the thesis. __________________________________, Graduate Coordinator _______________ Jacob Fisher, Ph.D. Date Department of Anthropology iv Abstract of PREHISTORIC FORAGING PATTERNS AT CA-SAC-47 SACRAMENTO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA by Justin Blake Cairns Subsistence studies conducted on regional archaeological deposits indicate that in the Sacramento Delta, as in the rest of the Central Valley, there is a decrease in foraging efficiency during the Late Period. A recently excavated site, CA-SAC-47, provides direct evidence of subsistence strategies in the form of faunal and plant remains. This faunal assemblage is compared to direct evidence of subsistence from Delta sites SAC-42, SAC-43, SAC-65, SAC-145, and SAC-329. The results and implications of this direct evidence are used to address site variability and resource selectivity. ___________________________________, Committee Chair Mark E.
    [Show full text]
  • Volume III, Chapter 5 Northern Pikeminnow
    Volume III, Chapter 5 Northern Pikeminnow TABLE OF CONTENTS 5.0 Northern Pikeminnow (Ptychocheilus oregonensis)................................................... 5-1 5.1 Distribution ................................................................................................................. 5-1 5.2 Life History Characteristics ........................................................................................ 5-2 5.2.1 Size & Mortality................................................................................................... 5-2 5.2.2 Population Dynamics & Demographic Risk........................................................ 5-3 5.3 Status & Abundance Trends........................................................................................ 5-4 5.3.1 Abundance............................................................................................................ 5-4 5.3.2 Productivity.......................................................................................................... 5-5 5.3.3 Harvest................................................................................................................. 5-6 5.4 Factors Affecting Population Status............................................................................ 5-7 5.4.1 Northern Pikeminnow Management Program History........................................ 5-7 5.4.2 NPMP Review .................................................................................................... 5-11 5.4.3 Harvest..............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Acipenser Brevirostrum
    AR-405 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF SHORTNOSE STURGEON Acipenser brevirostrum Prepared by the Shortnose Sturgeon Status Review Team for the National Marine Fisheries Service National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration November 1, 2010 Acknowledgements i The biological review of shortnose sturgeon was conducted by a team of scientists from state and Federal natural resource agencies that manage and conduct research on shortnose sturgeon along their range of the United States east coast. This review was dependent on the expertise of this status review team and from information obtained from scientific literature and data provided by various other state and Federal agencies and individuals. In addition to the biologists who contributed to this report (noted below), the Shortnose Stugeon Status Review Team would like to acknowledge the contributions of Mary Colligan, Julie Crocker, Michael Dadswell, Kim Damon-Randall, Michael Erwin, Amanda Frick, Jeff Guyon, Robert Hoffman, Kristen Koyama, Christine Lipsky, Sarah Laporte, Sean McDermott, Steve Mierzykowski, Wesley Patrick, Pat Scida, Tim Sheehan, and Mary Tshikaya. The Status Review Team would also like to thank the peer reviewers, Dr. Mark Bain, Dr. Matthew Litvak, Dr. David Secor, and Dr. John Waldman for their helpful comments and suggestions. Finally, the SRT is indebted to Jessica Pruden who greatly assisted the team in finding the energy to finalize the review – her continued support and encouragement was invaluable. Due to some of the similarities between shortnose and Atlantic sturgeon life history strategies, this document includes text that was taken directly from the 2007 Atlantic Sturgeon Status Review Report (ASSRT 2007), with consent from the authors, to expedite the writing process.
    [Show full text]
  • Volume II, Chapter 2 Columbia River Estuary and Lower Mainstem Subbasins
    Volume II, Chapter 2 Columbia River Estuary and Lower Mainstem Subbasins TABLE OF CONTENTS 2.0 COLUMBIA RIVER ESTUARY AND LOWER MAINSTEM ................................ 2-1 2.1 Subbasin Description.................................................................................................. 2-5 2.1.1 Purpose................................................................................................................. 2-5 2.1.2 History ................................................................................................................. 2-5 2.1.3 Physical Setting.................................................................................................... 2-7 2.1.4 Fish and Wildlife Resources ................................................................................ 2-8 2.1.5 Habitat Classification......................................................................................... 2-20 2.1.6 Estuary and Lower Mainstem Zones ................................................................. 2-27 2.1.7 Major Land Uses................................................................................................ 2-29 2.1.8 Areas of Biological Significance ....................................................................... 2-29 2.2 Focal Species............................................................................................................. 2-31 2.2.1 Selection Process............................................................................................... 2-31 2.2.2 Ocean-type Salmonids
    [Show full text]
  • Final Rogue Fall Chinook Salmon Conservation Plan
    CONSERVATION PLAN FOR FALL CHINOOK SALMON IN THE ROGUE SPECIES MANAGEMENT UNIT Adopted by the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission January 11, 2013 Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife 3406 Cherry Avenue NE Salem, OR 97303 Rogue Fall Chinook Salmon Conservation Plan - January 11, 2013 Table of Contents Page FOREWORD .................................................................................................................................. 4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................................................................... 5 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... 6 RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER NATIVE FISH CONSERVATION PLANS ................................. 7 CONSTRAINTS ............................................................................................................................. 7 SPECIES MANAGEMENT UNIT AND CONSTITUENT POPULATIONS ............................... 7 BACKGROUND ........................................................................................................................... 10 Historical Context ......................................................................................................................... 10 General Aspects of Life History .................................................................................................... 14 General Aspects of the Fisheries ..................................................................................................
    [Show full text]