Prepared in cooperation with the Bureau of Reclamation Spawning Migration Movements of Lost River and Shortnose Suckers in the Williamson and Sprague Rivers, Oregon, Following the Removal of Chiloquin Dam—2009 Annual Report Open-File Report 2011-1147 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Spawning Migration Movements of Lost River and Shortnose Suckers in the Williamson and Sprague Rivers, Oregon, Following the Removal of Chiloquin Dam—2009 Annual Report By Craig M. Ellsworth and Scott P. VanderKooi Prepared in cooperation with the Bureau of Reclamation Open-File Report 2011-1147 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior KEN SALAZAR, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Marcia K. McNutt, Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2011 For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment, visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1-888-ASK-USGS. For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod To order this and other USGS information products, visit http://store.usgs.gov Suggested citation: Ellsworth, C.M., and VanderKooi S.P., 2011, Spawning migration movements of Lost River and shortnose suckers in the Williamson and Sprague Rivers, Oregon, following the removal of Chiloquin Dam—2009 Annual Report: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2011-1147, 20 p. Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted material contained within this report. Contents Abstract ......................................................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................... 2 Background ................................................................................................................................................ 2 Chiloquin Dam and its Effects .................................................................................................................... 3 Current Study ............................................................................................................................................. 4 Description of Study Area .......................................................................................................................... 4 Study Methods ............................................................................................................................................... 5 Fish Collection, Radio Tags, and Surgical Procedures .............................................................................. 5 Fish Tracking and Data Collection ............................................................................................................. 6 Data Analysis ............................................................................................................................................. 6 Results of Data Analyses ............................................................................................................................... 7 Lost River Sucker ....................................................................................................................................... 7 Shortnose Sucker ...................................................................................................................................... 8 Radio Tag Retention and Gear Performance ............................................................................................. 8 Sucker Spawning and Migration Patterns ...................................................................................................... 9 Conclusions ................................................................................................................................................. 11 Acknowledgments ....................................................................................................................................... 11 References Cited ......................................................................................................................................... 12 Figures Figure 1. Map of the study area showing locations of remote telemetry stations used to determine the spawning area distribution and movements of Lost River and shortnose suckers in the Williamson and Sprague Rivers, Oregon, 2009 .................................................................................................................... 14 Figure 2. Farthest upstream detections of individual radio-tagged Lost River suckers released upstream of the Williamson River fish weir, Oregon, 2009 .......................................................................... 15 Figure 3. Farthest upstream detections of individual radio-tagged shortnose suckers released upstream of the Williamson River fish weir, Oregon, 2009 .......................................................................... 16 Tables Table 1. Number of radio-tagged Lost River suckers and shortnose suckers released upstream of the Williamson River fish weir and detected at three remote telemetry stations in the lower Williamson and Sprague Rivers, Oregon, 2009 ............................................................................................................. 18 Table 2. Time spent upstream of the Williamson River fish weir, in the Sprague River, and within range of the telemetry receiver and the number of approaches on the dam site for radio-tagged Lost River and shortnose suckers prior to the removal of Chiloquin Dam (2006 and 2007; Ellsworth and others, 2007b; U.S. Geological Survey, unpub. data, 2007) and after its removal (2009), Oregon ......................... 19 iii Conversion Factors SI to Inch/Pound Multiply By To obtain Length centimeter (cm) 0.3937 inch (in.) millimeter (mm) 0.03937 inch (in.) meter (m) 3.281 foot (ft) kilometer (km) 0.6214 mile (mi) Area square centimeter (cm2) 0.1550 square inch (ft2) square kilometer (km2) 0.3861 square mile (mi2) Volume liter (L) 0.2642 gallon (gal) cubic meter (m3) 35.31 cubic foot (ft3) Flow rate meter per second (m/s) 3.281 foot per second (ft/s) cubic meter per second (m3/s) 35.31 cubic foot per second (ft3/s) Mass gram (g) 0.03527 ounce, avoirdupois (oz) kilogram (kg) 2.205 pound avoirdupois (lb) Temperature in degrees Celsius (°C) may be converted to temperatures in degrees Fahrenheit (°F) by using the equation: °F=(1.8×°C)+32. Horizontal coordinate information is referenced to the North American Datum of 1927 (NAD 27). iv Spawning Migration Movements of Lost River and Shortnose Suckers in the Williamson and Sprague Rivers, Oregon, Following the Removal of Chiloquin Dam—2009 Annual Report By Craig M. Ellsworth and Scott P. VanderKooi Abstract The Chiloquin Dam was located at river kilometer (rkm) 1.3 on the Sprague River near the town of Chiloquin, Oregon. The dam was identified as a barrier that potentially inhibited or prevented the upstream spawning migrations and other movements of endangered Lost River suckers (Deltistes luxatus), shortnose suckers (Chasmistes brevirostris), and other fish in the Sprague River. Our research objectives in 2009 were to evaluate adult catostomid spawning migration patterns using radio telemetry to identify and describe shifts in spawning area distribution and migration behavior following the removal of Chiloquin Dam in 2008. We attached external radio transmitters to 58 Lost River suckers and 59 shortnose suckers captured at the Williamson River fish weir. A total of 17 radio-tagged Lost River suckers and one radio-tagged shortnose sucker were detected approaching the site of the former Chiloquin Dam but only two radio-tagged fish (one male Lost River sucker and one female Lost River sucker) were detected crossing upstream of the dam site. A lower proportion of radio-tagged shortnose suckers were detected migrating into the Sprague River when compared with previous years. Detections on remote passive integrated transponder (PIT) tag arrays located in the Sprague River show that although the proportion of fish coming into the Sprague River is small when compared to the number of fish crossing the Williamson River fish weir, the number of fish migrating upstream of the Chiloquin Dam site increased exponentially in the first year since its removal. These data will be used in conjunction with larval production and adult spawning distribution data to evaluate the effectiveness of dam removal in order to provide increased access to underutilized spawning habitat located further upstream in the Sprague River and to reduce the crowding of spawning fish below the dam site. 1 Introduction Background The upper Klamath Basin in south-central Oregon has several endemic fish species, two of which, Lost River sucker and shortnose sucker, were listed under the Endangered Species Act in 1988 (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2002). A third catostomid, Klamath largescale sucker, also is an upper Klamath Basin endemic and has been identified by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) as a species of concern (Oregon Natural Heritage Information Center, 2004). Like other