| Report Number: |
4 (Final Report)
Previous Report
|
| Report Period: |
01/30/2012 to 03/31/2014 |
| Report Status: |
Approved
|
| File Number: |
16608 |
| Project Title: |
San Joaquin River Restoration Program Interim Flows Program, Steelhead Monitoring Plan |
| Project Status: |
New |
| Previous Federal or State Permit/Authorization: |
|
| Permit/Authorization Requested: |
- ESA Section 10(a)(1)(A) permit (Pacific fish/invertebrate research)
- Expired
|
| Where will activities occur? |
California (including offshore waters)
|
| State department of fish and game/wildlife: |
N/A |
| Research Timeframe: |
Start: 01/27/2012 End: 03/31/2014 |
| Sampling Season/Project Duration: |
The sampling season for this activity would be for several seasons, including during the San Joaquin River Restoration Program (SJRRP) Interim Flows Project, during Water Year 2012 (WY 2012) and subsequent water years through March 31, 2014. Further, the monitoring of Central Valley steelhead would only occur between December 1 or approximately the time that California Department of Fish and Game's Hills Ferry Barrier is removed from the San Joaquin River near the confluence of the Merced River, to the time that Vernalis Adaptive Management Program (VAMP) flows or similar flows begin on the tributaries in the lower San Joaquin River, approximately mid- to late-March. |
| Abstract: |
The implementation of Interim Flows includes implementation of the Steelhead Monitoring Plan (SMP) to check for Central Valley steelhead in the Restoration Area (located between the Merced River confluence and Friant Dam) during spring Interim Flows. Hills Ferry Barrier, located on the San Joaquin River near the confluence of the Merced River, is a weir designed to discourage fish migration to the upper reaches of the San Joaquin River. It is scheduled to be removed in mid-December. It is estimated that flows will occur as a result of VAMP or VAMP-like flows in the lower San Joaquin River tributaries from March 15th through April 30th. As a result, the critical timing for Central Valley steelhead monitoring within the Restoration Area would occur from mid-December through March 15th, as it is anticipated that steelhead would be attracted to tributary flows in the lower reaches. The Steelhead Monitoring Plan calls for the implementation of several options to monitor for steelhead that could make it past Hills Ferry Barrier.
The SMP shall be utilized to detect the presence or absence of steelhead that may enter the Restoration Area. The sampling season will begin early to include fall-run Chinook salmon in the area. The impacts associated with the implementation of the SMP are anticipated to be minimal as historical data from the California Department of Fish and Game at the Hills Ferry Barrier for the monitoring of fish at the barrier have yet to record Central Valley steelhead at the facility. |
Summarize your findings relative to the hypothesis, questions, or objectives in your
application. Describe how you accomplished your project goals or explain what prevented you from doing so.
The study goals were to monitor for adult CV Steelhead in the SJRRP Restoration Area that could be attracted by spring and fall Restoration flows and relocate captured fish to more suitable habitat below the confluence of the Merced River to provide a higher probability of survival and reproduction. We did not detect or capture any steelhead therefore no fish were handled or transported.
How did your research benefit the species, promote recovery, and conserve the target
species? For ESA-listed species, how did your research contribute to fulfilling the research needs or
objectives listed in the Recovery Plan or Conservation Plan (as applicable)?
The steelhead monitoring plan is an important study for the SJRRP to ensure its commitment to restore and maintain fish populations within the Restoration Area. Although no CV steelhead were detected or captured during this sampling period, continued monitoring of adult CV steelhead migration in the Restoration Area is important to provide information regarding the progress of the Restoration Program. Monitoring population abundance trends, rare and native species occurrences, and fish community assemblages will provide a biological indication of SJRRP's success.
Did you encounter any problems or have unexpected outcomes with the authorized
methodologies or gear? If yes, please describe. If you were permitted to use different methods, which
ones worked best and why?
No CV steelhead were encountered, however boat electrofishing would be the optimal sampling methodology that would be most efficient and effective for covering vast river miles. Fyke netting would be least invasive with limited recovery after handling.
As a result of your actions, what types of reactions did you observe from target
animals? From non-target animals? How often did you see these reactions (rate, percentage of times, etc.)?
Did your actions have any effects on habitat? Please explain.
No CV steelhead were detected, however much information on other native and non-native fishes were collected from the monitoring. Species numbers, percentages, CPUE's, and other information are provided in the annual report. There are no known effects to the habitat and monitoring only occurs once a month because capture of resident fish multiple times is anticipated. Monthly sampling is important to ensure fish recovery from sampling and handling stress between captures.
Were the mitigation measures you used successful in minimizing or avoiding adverse
impacts of your activities? What additional measures do you think might further minimize these reactions?
No CV steelhead were captured so it is difficult to measure the monitoring effects on this species. Future fish passage and construction within the SJRRP could include fish traps on passage structures that might minimize the need for monitoring throughout the river and focus on passage points that can be more effective and provide less collection-associated stress.
What efforts were made to share data or collaborate with other researchers during the
course of the permit? How did the collaborations occur (timing of field work, sharing vessels, sharing data)?
The final report is posted on the SJRRP website and the data collected from all fishes captured during the monitoring period is used to assess population abundance trends, rare and native species occurrences, and fish community assemblages that will provide a biological indication of SJRRP's success.
Please list any publications or reports that you have not already listed in your annual
reports.
San Joaquin River Restoration Program: Fish Assemblage Inventory and Monitoring, 2012–2013. San Joaquin River Restoration Program. Spring 2014.
As a result of your research, did you identify any new directions for future studies?
Please explain.
None during drought or low flow years. Once flows are restored over Sack Dam, greater focus can be made for monitoring Steelhead at this location.
Are there any new or emerging technologies that you could use to further your research?
If so, please describe.
Camera-based computer recognition technologies could be employed in the future to assist in the detection at passage points.
Do you have any comments on your permit conditions? Please explain if any of your
permit conditions were difficult to comply with or if there were any that were unclear to you.
Take numbers should be increased to two fish to gain a better understanding of environmental variables that may have drawn fish to the Restoration Area.
Do you think the take numbers that you requested in your permit application were
accurate and realistic? Please explain.
The take number should be increased to two fish. The likelihood of catching a steelhead in this area is low, however, if one was caught, it would be in the best interest of the fish population to continue sampling during whatever conditions brought this individual to the area.
Please provide any additional information about your research or your permit that
you would like to include.
None
