DOCSLIB.ORG

Trinity River Basin Salmon and Steelhead Monitoring Project

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

State of California The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE ANNUAL REPORT TRINITY RIVER BASIN SALMON AND STEELHEAD MONITORING PROJECT: CHINOOK AND COHO SALMON AND FALL-RUN STEELHEAD RUN-SIZE ESTIMATES USING MARK-RECAPTURE METHODS 2017-18 SEASON On the cover: Rainbow over the Trinity River. October 2017. State of California The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE ANNUAL REPORT TRINITY RIVER BASIN SALMON AND STEELHEAD MONITORING PROJECT: CHINOOK AND COHO SALMON AND FALL-RUN STEELHEAD RUN-SIZE ESTIMATES USING MARK-RECAPTURE METHODS 2017-18 SEASON by Mary Claire Kier, John Hileman and Ken Lindke Northern Region Klamath - Trinity Program 601 Locust Street Redding, CA 96001 AUGUST 2018 (THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK) FOREWORD This is the California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s (CDFW) Trinity River Basin Salmon and Steelhead Monitoring Project's twenty-ninth annual report to the United States Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation). Reported activities were funded by CDFW/Reclamation Cooperative Agreement Number R13AC20027. This report presents work performed on the main stem Trinity River and at Trinity River Hatchery. Necessity for performing our Klamath-Trinity basin monitoring activities are outlined in several Acts of Congress including Public Law 386 (69 Stat. 719), August 12, 1955; Public Law 98-541, October 24, 1984; the “Trinity River Basin Fish and Wildlife Management Reauthorization Act” of 1995; and the Trinity River “Record of Decision”, 2000. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The CDFW fisheries technicians on whom we relied heavily for the bulk of the field work in the 2017 season include: Michael Bradford, Liv Carter, Chris Hubler, Todd Newhouse, Melissa Reneski, Jane Sartori, Ron Smith, Steven Strite, Ted Tillinghast, and Nathan Keiki Yamasaki. Hoopa Valley Tribal Fisheries (HVTF) performed admirably during the installation and removal of both weirs, once again, and provided Billy Colegrove and Dexter Cooper as technicians to assist throughout weir season. We continue to benefit from our relationship with the HVTF department and appreciate the help we get from everyone who works on our weir installation and pull days. We value the cooperation of the CDFW Trinity River Hatchery staff during recovery efforts, and Doris Chase, Tom O’Gorman, Steve Strite, and the U.S. Forest Service for access, off-season in-basin equipment storage, and general project support. The CDFW monitoring program was approved by the Trinity Management Council (TMC) and funded by Reclamation through the Trinity River Restoration Program (TRRP) office in Weaverville, CA. We thank Caryn Hunt DeCarlo and the TRRP for their contract administration efforts. i Trinity River Basin Salmon and Steelhead Monitoring Project Chinook and Coho Salmon and Fall-Run Steelhead Run-Size Estimates 2017-18 Season (THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK) ii Trinity River Basin Salmon and Steelhead Monitoring Project Chinook and Coho Salmon and Fall-Run Steelhead Run-Size Estimates 2017-18 Season TABLE OF CONTENTS FOREWORD .................................................................................................................... i ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................................................................................... i TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................................. iii LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................... iv LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................ vi LIST OF APPENDICES ................................................................................................. vii ABSTRACT ..................................................................................................................... 1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 3 METHODS ...................................................................................................................... 4 RESULTS ...................................................................................................................... 11 DISCUSSION ................................................................................................................ 36 RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................. 44 LITERATURE CITED .................................................................................................... 45 APPENDICES ............................................................................................................... 48 iii Trinity River Basin Salmon and Steelhead Monitoring Project Chinook and Coho Salmon and Fall-Run Steelhead Run-Size Estimates 2017-18 Season LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Location of trapping/tagging weirs near Willow Creek and Junction City, and Trinity River Hatchery, in the Trinity River basin, 2017. ............................................ 5 Figure 2. Photograph of Alaskan-style weir, tripods, support channels, and conduit (looking upstream). Picture taken at Willow Creek weir, 2017. ................................. 6 Figure 3. Typical Junction City weir (JCW) configuration. This shows the weir in afternoon “open” mode, with conduit raised and boat gate removed. ..................... 6 Figure 4. Configuration of Willow Creek weir in 2017. Note the boat gate on the left, with a tunnel leading to the closer of the two traps, and the far side trap mostly submerged. ................................................................................................................... 7 Figure 5. Percent recovery of Junction City weir and Willow Creek weir marked Chinook at Trinity River Hatchery during the 2017-18 season. ...............................................12 Figure 6. Mean catch of spring Chinook Salmon in the Trinity River at Junction City weir, 2017. .............................................................................................................................14 Figure 7. Spring Chinook Salmon fork lengths (cm) observed at Junction City weir, Trinity River Hatchery, and both sites combined during the 2017-18 season.........15 Figure 8. Percent return of Trinity River Hatchery origin, coded-wire tagged, spring Chinook Salmon, brood years 1986-2012. .................................................................18 Figure 9. Hatchery and natural contributions to total spring Chinook run-size, upstream of Junction City weir, 1991 – 2017. .............................................................................19 Figure 10. Mean catch of fall Chinook Salmon in the Trinity River at Willow Creek weir, 2017. .............................................................................................................................21 Figure 11. Fork length frequency distribution of fall Chinook Salmon at Willow Creek weir and Trinity River Hatchery, 2017. ...............................................................................22 Figure 12. Percent return of Trinity River Hatchery origin, coded-wire tagged, fall Chinook Salmon, brood years 1986-2012. ................................................................................25 Figure 13. Hatchery and natural contributions to total fall Chinook Salmon run-size, upstream of Willow Creek weir, 1991 - 2017. .............................................................27 Figure 14. Mean catch of Coho Salmon trapped in the Trinity River at Willow Creek weir, 2017. .............................................................................................................................29 Figure 15. Coho Salmon fork lengths (cm) observed at Willow Creek weir, Trinity River Hatchery and both sites combined during the 2017-18 season. The arrow denotes the size used to separate jacks and adults for analysis. ..........................................30 Figure 16. Mean catch of fall-run steelhead in the Trinity River at Willow Creek weir, 2017. ......................................................................................................................................33 Figure 17. Steelhead fork lengths (cm) observed at Willow Creek weir, Trinity River Hatchery and both sites combined during the 2017-18 season. ..............................34 Figure 18. Total adult escapement, and escapement of natural origin spring Chinook Salmon to the Trinity River above Junction City weir, 2002-2017. ...........................36 Figure 19. Total adult escapement, and escapement of natural origin fall Chinook Salmon to the Trinity River upstream of Willow Creek weir, 2002-2017. .................37 iv Trinity River Basin Salmon and Steelhead Monitoring Project Chinook and Coho Salmon and Fall-Run Steelhead Run-Size Estimates 2017-18 Season Figure 20. Percent of total estimated run-size of fall Chinook Salmon tagged at Willow Creek weir, 2002 – 2017. ..............................................................................................38 Figure 21. Total adult escapement, and escapement of natural origin Coho Salmon to the Trinity River upstream of Willow Creek weir, 2002-2017. .........................................39 Figure 22. Total adult escapement, and escapement of natural origin steelhead to the Trinity River upstream of Willow Creek weir, 2002-2017. .........................................40 v Trinity River Basin Salmon and Steelhead Monitoring
Recommended publications
  • Upper Trinity River Watershed Analysis

    Upper Trinity River Watershed Analysis

    United States Department of Agriculture Upper Trinity River Forest Service Watershed Analysis Shasta-Trinity National Forest March 2005 Including Watershed Analysis for: Main Trinity River Watershed Coffee Creek Watershed East Fork Trinity River Watershed Stuart Fork Watershed Trinity Reservoir Watershed Granite Peak and the Trinity Alps, looking north into the Upper Trinity River Watershed. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at 202-720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a compliant of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 14th and Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice or TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Upper Trinity River Watershed Analysis Upper Trinity River Watershed Analysis Table of Contents Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 1: Characterization of the Watershed ............................................................. 3 The Trinity River Sub-Basin......................................................................................................
  • Wildlife Biological Assessment Conner Creek Mouth Fish Passage Enhancement Project Junction City, California Trinity County

    Wildlife Biological Assessment Conner Creek Mouth Fish Passage Enhancement Project Junction City, California Trinity County

    Wildlife Biological Assessment Conner Creek Mouth Fish Passage Enhancement Project Junction City, California Trinity County Prepared by: /s/ Carla De Juilio Date: December 31, 2014 Carla De Juilio, Wildlife Biologist Northwest California Resource Conservation & Development Council Reviewed and Approved by: Date: This Document has been prepared for the Northwest California Resource Conser- vation & Development Council’s Five Counties Salmonid Conservation Program. 1 Table of Contents I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 3 II. CRITICAL HABITAT .......................................................................................................................... 6 III. CONSULTATIONS TO DATE ............................................................................................................ 7 IV. CURRENT MANAGEMENT DIRECTION ........................................................................................ 8 V. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION ......................................................................................... 9 VI. SPECIES ACCOUNTS AND HABITAT- ESA and CESA SPECIES .............................................. 16 VI.1 Northern Spotted Owl (Strix occidentalis caurina) ........................................................................ 16 VI.2 Willow Flycatcher (Empiodonax traillii) ....................................................................................... 17 VI.3 Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus
  • Finding of No Significant Impact

    Finding of No Significant Impact

    U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION MID-PACIFIC REGION NORTHERN CALIFORNIA AREA OFFICE TRINITY RIVER RESTORATION PROGRAM WEAVERVILLE, CALIFORNIA FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended, and with the Council on Environmental Quality's Regulations for Implementing the Procedural Provisions ofNEPA (40 CFR Parts 1500-1508), the Trinity River Restoration Program (TRRP) office of the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) has found that the Proposed Project, supported by the Trinity River Channel Rehabilitation Sites: Bucktail (River Mile 105.3-106.35) and Lower Junction City (River Mile 78.8-79.8.) Environmental Assessment/Initial Study (EA/IS), will result in no significant impacts on the human environment considering the context and intensity of impacts. Supporting documentation in the EA/JS was prepared to meet the requirements ofNEPA as well as the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The EA/IS is tiered to the Trinity River Mainstem Fishery Restoration Program Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and Channel Rehabilitation and Sediment Management Activities for Remaining Phase 1 and Phase 2 Sites, Part 1: Final Master Environmental Impact Report (Master EIR). The Lower Junction City site is considered a subsequent site-specific project that is tiered to the Master EIR. Although the EA/IS also covered work at the Bucktail Rehabilitation Site, that work is not being proposed at this time and is not covered in this Finding of No Significant Impact. Recommended by: dpil 2h, k /f' Date Environmental Scientist, Trinity River Restoration Program Approved by: ~~s-:,01£ Robin M. Schrock Oat 7 ' Executive Director, FONSI No.
  • North Fork Trinity River, East Fork North Fork Trinity River and Canyon Creek Watershed Analysis - March 2003

    North Fork Trinity River, East Fork North Fork Trinity River and Canyon Creek Watershed Analysis - March 2003

    North Fork Trinity River, East Fork North Fork Trinity River and Canyon Creek Watershed Analysis - March 2003 Introduction The Purpose of Watershed Analysis Watershed analysis (WA) is a procedure used to characterize the human, aquatic, riparian, and terrestrial features, conditions, processes and interactions (collectively referred to as “ecosystem elements”) within a watershed. Watershed analysis is an important component of the Aquatic Conservation Strategy (ACS) along with Riparian Reserves, Key Watersheds, and watershed restoration. It provides a systematic way to understand and organize ecosystem information. In doing so, watershed analysis enhances our ability to estimate direct, indirect and cumulative effects of our management activities on ACS objectives and guide the general type, location and sequence of appropriate management activities within the watershed. Watershed Analysis is required in Key Watersheds, such as the North Fork Trinity River and Canyon Creek Watersheds; prior to determining how proposed land management activities meet ACS objectives. In planning for ecosystem management and establishing Riparian Reserves to protect and restore riparian and aquatic habitat, the overall watershed condition and the array of processes operating there need to be considered. Watershed condition includes more than just the state of the channel and riparian area. It also includes the condition of the uplands, distribution and type of seral classes of vegetation, land use history, effects of previous natural and land-use related disturbances and distribution and abundance of species and populations throughout the watershed. Watershed analyses are conducted by a team of journey-level specialists who follow the six-step process outlined in “Ecosystem Analysis at the Watershed Scale – Federal Guide for Watershed Analysis”.
  • Salmon, Steelhead, and Trout in California

    Salmon, Steelhead, and Trout in California

    ! "#$%&'(!")**$+*#,(!#',!-.&/)! 0'!1#$02&.'0#! !"#"$%&'(&#)&*+,-.+#"/0&1#$)#& !"#$%&#'"(&))*++*&,$-"./"012*3&#,*1"4#&5'6"7889" PETER B. MOYLE, JOSHUA A. ISRAEL, AND SABRA E. PURDY CENTER FOR WATERSHED SCIENCES, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, DAVIS DAVIS, CA 95616 -#3$*!&2!1&')*')4! !0:;<=>?@AB?;4C"DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD"E" F;4G<@H04F<;"DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD"I" :>!B!4J"B<H;4!F;C"KG<LF;0?"=F;4?G"C4??>J?!@""DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD"7E" :>!B!4J"B<H;4!F;C"KG<LF;0?"CHBB?G"C4??>J?!@"DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD"E7" ;<G4J?G;"0!>FM<G;F!"0<!C4!>"=F;4?G"C4??>J?!@""DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD"IE" ;<G4J?G;"0!>FM<G;F!"0<!C4!>"CHBB?G"C4??>J?!@""DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD"NO" 0?;4G!>"L!>>?P"C4??>J?!@"DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD"OI" 0?;4G!>"0!>FM<G;F!"0<!C4"C4??>J?!@""DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD"Q7" C<H4JR0?;4G!>"0!>FM<G;F!"0<!C4"C4??>J?!@""DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD"QS" C<H4J?G;"0!>FM<G;F!"0<!C4"C4??>J?!@""DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD"9O" G?CF@?;4"0<!C4!>"G!F;T<="4G<H4"DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD"SQ"
  • TRINITY RIVER TRIBUTARY SUMMER STEELHEAD and SPRING CHINOOK SNORKEL SURVEYS 1990 – 2014 Page | 1

    TRINITY RIVER TRIBUTARY SUMMER STEELHEAD and SPRING CHINOOK SNORKEL SURVEYS 1990 – 2014 Page | 1

    CDFW Trinity River Project, Weaverville Office TRINITY RIVER TRIBUTARY SUMMER STEELHEAD AND SPRING CHINOOK SNORKEL SURVEYS 1990 – 2014 Page | 1 Trinity River Tributary Summer Steelhead and Spring Chinook Snorkel Surveys 1990-2014: Canyon Creek, North Fork Trinity River, South Fork Trinity River, and New River Andrew M. Hill, Environmental Scientist 1 Robert M. Sullivan, Senior Environmental Scientist 2 Eric Wiseman, Fishery Biologist California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), Northern Region/Fisheries Program, Trinity River Project, P.O. Box 1185, Weaverville, CA 96093, USA. 1 California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), Northern Region/Wildlife Program (Lands), North Coast Wildlife Area Complex, P.O. Box 1185, Weaverville, CA 96093, USA. 2 United State Forest Service (USFS), Weaverville, CA 96093, USA *Correspondent: [email protected] Abstract: Snorkel surveys for spring Chinook and summer steelhead were conducted between 1990 and 2014 in the four major tributaries to the Trinity River: Canyon Creek, North Fork Trinity River, South Fork Trinity River, and New River. Our analysis showed that tributaries of the Trinity River continued to have more summer steelhead than spring Chinook for the annual sample period 1990 to 2014. The correlation between number of summer steelhead and year sampled was significant and the trend was relatively strong and positive, which suggests that the “population” of summer steelhead in the Trinity River appears to have increased over time. Numbers of summer steelhead from Trinity River tributaries showed a series of three primary oscillating peaks (1991, 2003, and 2012), whereas numbers of spring Chinook were low but they continue to be observed on an annual basis.
  • Trinity River Channel Rehabilitation Site: Bucktail (River Mile 105.45-107.0) Draft Environmental Assessment/Initial Study DOI-BLM-CA-N060-2015-0057-EA and TR-EA0215

    Trinity River Channel Rehabilitation Site: Bucktail (River Mile 105.45-107.0) Draft Environmental Assessment/Initial Study DOI-BLM-CA-N060-2015-0057-EA and TR-EA0215

    Trinity River Channel Rehabilitation Site: Bucktail (River Mile 105.45-107.0) Draft Environmental Assessment/Initial Study DOI-BLM-CA-N060-2015-0057-EA and TR-EA0215 November 2015 This document has been split into three parts to reduce the size of the document for distribution via the internet. This is Part 1 of 3 A Table of Contents for the entire document is located at the beginning of this part. Part 1: Document cover through Appendix A (cover to page A-30) Part 2: Appendix B: Response to Comments part 1 (page B-1 to B-52) Part 3: Appendix B: Response to Comments part 2 through Appendix D (page B-53 to D-4, end of document) Trinity River Channel Rehabilitation Site: Bucktail (River Mile 105.45-107.0) Draft Environmental Assessment/Initial Study DOI-BLM-CA-N060-2015-0057-EA and TR-EA0215 To tier to: Trinity River Mainstem Fishery Restoration Environmental Impact Statement and Channel Rehabilitation and Sediment Management Activities for Remaining Phase 1 and Phase 2 Sites, Part 1: Final Master Environmental Impact Report and Part 2: Environmental Assessment/Final Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse # 2008032110) Limekiln Gulch 2015 Rehabilitation Site and Modeling of Predicted Depths for Design Conditions November 2015 California Lead Agency for CEQA North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board Project Proponent and Federal Lead Agency for NEPA Trinity River Restoration Program U. S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Federal Co-lead Agency for NEPA U. S. Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Management Project Proponent’s Consultant North Wind Services, LLC This page left intentionally blank.

  • Trinity County Resource Conservation District

    Trinity River Watershed Council Expansion WaterSMART: Cooperative Watershed Management Program Submitted by: Trinity County Resource Conservation District P.O. Box 1450, Weaverville, CA 96093 Shiloe Braxton, District Manager [email protected] Donna Rupp, Watershed Coordinator [email protected] 530-623-6004 530-623-6006 fax May 4, 2016 Table of Contents Technical Proposal and Evaluation Criteria Executive Summary...................................................................................3 Background................................................................................................4 Maps of watershed ...................................................................................7 o Entire Trinity River Watershed o Current geographic focus of the TRWC Technical Project Description..................................................................9 Evaluation Criteria...................................................................................16 Appendix A – Wildfire in Trinity County, excerpt pages 8-12 from the Trinity County Community Wildfire Protection Plan (Attachment) Appendix B – Schedule of Work for Evaluation Criteria (1 page – Attachment; part of 25 page limit) Appendix C - Letters of Support (Attachment) Resolution by Trinity River Watershed Council (Attachment) Resolution by Trinity County Resource Conservation District Board (To be supplied to Reclamation after TCRCD board meeting on May 18, 2016) Budget Proposal (Attachment) Budget Narrative (Attachment) 2 Executive Summary May 4, 2016 Applicant name:

  • Sediment Discharge in the Trinity River Basin California

    SEDIMENT DISCHARGE IN THE TRINITY RIVER BASIN CALIFORNIA Water-Resources Investigations 49-73 Prepared in cooperation with the California Department of Water Resources BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA 11. ReportNo. SHEET (PRET~1M II 4.T ilkandSublide 8. PerformingOrganizationRept. J. M. Knott " No. WRT uQ-71 9. PerformingOrganizationName andAddress 10.Project/Task/WorkUnitNo. U.S. Geological Survey Water Resources Division 345 Middlefield Road Menlo Park. Calif. 94025 12.SponsoringOrganizationName and Address 13.Type ofReport& Period Covered U.S. Geological Survey Water Resources Division 345 Middlefield Road Menlo Park. Calif. 94025 15.SupplementaryNotes Prepared in cooperation with the California Deaprtment of Water Resources. 16.Abst~~g_term total-sediment discharge of the Trinity River and selected tributaries is estimated. Water-discharge data for the period 1912-70 and sediment data collected between 1955 and 1970 were used to evaluate trends and relations between sediment discharge (suspended and bedload) and water discharge. The hydraulic and sediment-transport characteristics of many of the streams in th basin were significantly altered by the December 1964 flood. Data indicate that the depth and velocity of streams changed drastically; and that for equal magnitudes of streamflow, suspended-sediment discharges after the 1964 flood were several times larger than before the flood. The long-term average annual sediment discharge of the Trinity River near Hoopa i estimated to be 3,120,000 tons (2,830,000 metric tons). The percentage of clay, silt, and sand or coarser material at this station is estimated to be 20, 32, and 48 percent. Bedload discharge is estimated to be 19 percent of the total-sediment discharge.
  • Final Fed Petition NC Summer Steelhead

    Final Fed Petition NC Summer Steelhead

    FRIENDS OF THE EEL RIVER Working for the recovery ofour Wild & Scenic River, its fisheries and communities. Thursday, November 15, 2018 Wilbur Ross Secretary of Commerce 1401 Constitution Avenue Washington, DC 20230 Secretary Ross: Please find attached Friends of the Eel River's petition to list Northern California summer steelhead as an Endangered Distinct Population Segment under the Endangered Species Act. Pursuant to 50 CFR 424.14(b), FOER provided notice to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife of our intent to file this petition on October 2, 2018. Pursuant to 50 CFR 424.14(c)(9), FOER includes here copies of both our notice letter to the Department and the electronic mail transmitting that notice letter. Thank you for your timely attention to this matter. Conservation Director HUMBOLDT OFFICE NORTH BAY OFFICE [email protected] David Keller, [email protected] PO Box 4945, Arcata, CA 95518 • 707.798.6345 1327 I Street, Petaluma, CA 94952 • 707.763.9336 FRIENDS OF THE E EL RIVER Working for the recovery of our Wild & Scenic River, its fisheries and communities. Tuesday, October 2, 2018 Wildlife Branch - Nongame Wildlife 1812 9t h Street Sacramento, CA 95811 via email to [email protected] Dear DFW Wildlife Branch staff, We at Friends of the Eel River intend to submit a petition to NOAA Fisheries to list Northern California summer steelhead as an endangered DPS under the federal ESA. Under 50 CFR 424.14(b) and (c)(9), revised last year, we are now required to notify “the state agency responsible for the management and conservation of fish, plant or wildlife resources in each State where the species that is the subject of the petition occurs.” Northern California summer steelhead occur only in California.
  • Selected Aspects of the Ecology of Adult Summer

    Selected Aspects of the Ecology of Adult Summer

    SELECTED ASPECTS OF THE ECOLOGY OF ADULT SUMMER STEEIBEAD IN TRINITY RIVER, CALIFORNIA by J. Lincoln Freese A Thesis Presented to The Faculty of Humboldt State University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science Aup:ust , 19 82 SELECTED AS.PECTS OF THE ECOLOGY OF ADULT SUMMER STEELHEAD IN TRINITY RIVER , CALIFORNIA by J. Lincoln Freese ABSTRACT The abundance, seasonal distribution, holding habitat and behav­ ior of adult summer steelhead were studied during the summers of 1979- 1981 in the Trinity River system, California. The North Fork Trinity River and New River were the only streams in the drainage harboring significant numbers of steelhead during the summer months. Estimated combined run size for both streams ranged from a maximum of 776 fish in 1980 to a minimum of 455 fish in 1981. Summer steelhead began entering the tributaries in early June; entry peaked during mid-July. Steelhead numbers and distribution had substantially stabilized by early August. Summer steelhead were tagged in a single holding pool in the North Fork Trinity River during Septem­ ber 1981. Subsequent surveys revealed that they remained in that pool until the first storm fronts had passed through the area in early Octo­ ber, at which time small groups of fish rapidly migrated upstream. How­ ever, some tagged fish were still present at the tagging site in early November. High stream discharge precluded further survey work after that time. Holding pools do not appear to be a limiting factor for adult summer steelhead in either tributary. During the study period, the percentage of pools harboring one or more adult summer steelhead ranged from a minimum of 14 percent to a maximum of 36 percent in the North Fork; corresponding values for the New River were 27 percent and 31 percent.