Steve Gephard (Inland Fisheries Division, Dept. of Energy and Environmental Protection, State of Connecticut) Overview

Stocking Salmon As a Means of Restoring Salmon Populations An Overview
CASE STUDY: The Connecticut River Restoration Program
Stephen Gephard Connecticut Department Energy & Environmental Protection Inland Fisheries Division
TALK OUTLINE: Review practices of stocking various life stages of Atlantic salmon smolt fry Parr key issues
donor stocks quality of hatchery fish physiology fish health when to stock release practices
What worked and what did not Lessons learned All from the perspective of the Connecticut River program (and other U.S. programs) Management, restoration perspective
Boosting Salmon Numbers: Is stocking the answer? Glasgow, Scotland Nov. 27-28, 2013- GEPHARD
Penobscot River
Connecticut River
Downeast Rivers
Long Island Sound

Cape Cod
660 km
29,200 km2 watershed 148 tributaries mean discharge 560 m3 longest salmon river in North America
mouth near southern extent of range
BASIC INFORMATION ABOUT THE PROGRAM
Cooperative program between the four States and three federal agencies Administered by the Connecticut River Atlantic Salmon Commission (CRASC) goal was to restore a self-sustaining run of salmon to support recreational angling and public benefit native run of salmon gone since ~1810
hatchery-based restoration program

no harvest allowed until population reaches some stable level 1967 2012 (CRASC created by U.S. Congress in 1983)
OBJECTIVE OF STOCKING- To create a run where none existed at the time (restoration).
SMOLT STOCKING
Started with 2Smolt program shifted to 1Smolt program

less expensive less time in the hatchery fewer mega-smolts not able to determine if there is a difference in return rates
TAGGING/MARKING
Carlin Coded Wire Tag freeze branding fin clips (AD)
ORIGIN OF EGGS
Objective- use eggs from closest river. None available from Maine. Objective- use eggs from various rivers assuming genetic diversity. Let natural selection determine which genes are well-adapted to new river. first eggs:
Newfoundland
Quebec
New Brunswick (Miramichi)
Some > 1,000 km away and from much different biomes.

SEA RETURNS Most achieved using Canadian stocks= 7 in one year. Penobscot River eggs became available in early 1970s First year of Penobscot River stock smolts, sea returns numbered 90.
Conclusion- origin of donor stocks matters.
Sea return are very low. Not enough smolts going out Need hatchery program but dont want fish from another river nor dont want to capture all returning adults for broodstock.
Instead, wild parr are captured, brought back to the hatchery and held in separate rearing units, and raised to adult stage so they produce eggs and future fry for stream stocking.
PHYSIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENTS
Important to conclude that smolts are truly smolts Help determine best time for release Help identify stress levels in the system Help evaluate different rearing & release practices
Gill Na+,K+-ATPase Activity (mol ADP mg protein -1 h-1)
12
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Plasma growth hormone (ng ml-1)
20
Plasma cortisol (ng ml-1)
15
Parr < 11 cm in Jan Smolt > 12 cm in Jan
Parr LDN Smolt LDN
30
20
10
10
Jan
Feb
Mar
Gill Na+,K+-ATPase Activity (mol ADP mg protein-1 h-1)
Apr
May
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
12
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
(McCormick et al. 2008)
Higher levels of plasma growth hormone and cortisol in smolt than in parr in late spring Correlated with large increases in gill Na+,K+-ATPase and salinity tolerance in smolts
GILL Na,K-ATPase ACTIVITY (mol mg prot h )
12
370
-1
SEAWATER CHALLENGE
-1
PLASMA OSMOLALITY (ng ml )
-1
10
* *
360
SMOLT
350
340
* * * * *
SMOLT
JUN
330
*
2 0 JAN FEB MAR APR
PARR
320
310
MAY
JUN
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
PLASMA OSMOLALITY (mOsm) AFTER SEAWATER CHALLENGE
370
350
r = 0.87
330
310
2 4 6 8 10 GILL Na,K-ATPase ACTIVITY (mol mg prot-1 h-1)
USE OF WELL-WATER HATCHERIES VS. SURFACE WATER HATCHERIES

well-water is a constant 10 C surface water temperature varies seasonally
parr from well-water hatcheries silver but dont always undergo full smoltification
radio-tracking of some well-water smolts showed the fish moved upstream.
RELEASE METHODS
USE OF STREAMSIDE IMPRINT PONDS FOR DELAYED RELEASE Disease and fungus problems Evidence of retarded smoltification due to high densities (~20,000 per 11 m diameter ponds)
Night stocking
inconclusive
TIME OF RELEASE
Best returns for fish released near peak flows River discharge
Peak of stream-reared smolts much later
Jan
Mar
June
Oct
Dec
Date of peak flows with climate change is getting earlier but less predictable.
EFFECT OF SIZE ON SMOLTIFICATION
Stream-reared smolts
FALL GROWTH VERY IMPORTANT. PRE-SMOLT SPRING GROWTH LIKELY DOESNT COUNT TOWARD Boosting Salmon Numbers: Is stocking the answer? Glasgow, Scotland Nov. 27-28, 2013GEPHARD THIS THRESHOLD.
EFFECT OF SMOLT SIZE ON ADULT RETURN RATE
Adult Return Rate
Best size range for Connecticut River
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
Smolt Size (in cm)
FIN CONDITION
Adults never return from sea exhibiting extreme cases of fin damage. Established concept of fatal fin condition. Defined as values <3 for pectoral or caudal fins.
set as hatchery objectives

performed pre-stocking subsampled assessment surveys
Tracked for each raceway:

mean value for each fin mean value for all fins percentage fatal fin condition
Mindful there are many confounding factors such as conditions at sea, but there appeared to be correlation between % fatal fin condition and sea returns.
typically there is a relationship between rearing density and fin condition & size hatchery managers like to meet or exceed production goals set by managers data suggests quality is better than quantity
suggest managers set production goals in terms of quality

let the manager figure out appropriate quantity
FISH HEALTH
pathogens can affect smolt performance challenges: furunculosis, cold-water disease worried about sub-lethal infections, esp. during smoltification vaccinated smolts for furunculosis and Vibrio (no benefit detected)
STOCKING LOCATION
Most smolts stocked below all hydroelectric dams to minimize turbine losses. Observations suggested that predators acclimated to large-scale releases and congregated. Tagging studies suggested that lower river released fish emigrated quickly; perhaps in saltwater within 2 3 days. One study of smolts released below head-of-tide fishway revealed that two years later, a significant number of the adults failed to ever ascend the fishway. Based on several concerns, some smolts were released in streams many miles upstream of hydroelectric dams with fish bypasses. Recaptures at bypass sampling stations revealed emigration was delayed by a month and overall condition of smolts had improved.
Extended experience in free-flowing stream habitat may be beneficial for hatchery smolts
RETURN RATES
Return Rates for Hatchery-reared Smolts- Farmington River

0.25
0.2
Return Rate (%)
0.15
1Smolts
0.1
no smolts
2Smolts
0.05
0 1986
1991
1996 YEAR
2001
2006
2011
FRY STOCKING
RATIONALE smolt return rates declining preliminary fry return rates much higher difficult to maintain quality of smolts concern about natural selection in respect to stock development lots of vacant but productive habitat
Volunteer-based fry stocking program
Stocking techniques
-Not below 10 C -Not during high flows -Not in high velocity areas - spread out the fish
Stocking techniques
POINT STOCKING
(This may work better for unfed fry than fed fry)
Stocking techniques
A FISH BEHIND EVERY ROCK STOCKING
(Totally inpractical)
Stocking techniques
SCATTER STOCKING
Best Stage at Which to Stock?
Never sac fry!
Unfed fry: Developmental index of 95 100. 1,000 to the pound or ~2,200 to the kg.
Fed fry: up to 750 to the pound or ~ 350 to the kg.
Parr- a different subject
Stocking Fry into good habitat successfully established fall parr in streams comparable to densities reported for wild salmon
stocking more fry produces more fall parr up to a point.

at some level of stocking, you stop getting more parr varies by stream but plotting all data for New England, that level is around 50 fry per 100 square meters. If there is plenty of habitat but limited number of fry, best to spread them out and maximize the amount of habitat in production.
Gibson 1992
Return Rates per 10,000 for Fry Stocked in the Connecticut River
1.8 1.6 1.4 NUMBER OF ADULTS RETURNED 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 1977
1982
1987
1992
1997
2002
2007
YEAR
Return Rates per 10,000 for Fry Stocked in the Connecticut River
1.8 1.6 1.4 NUMBER OF ADULTS RETURNED 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 1977
If returns rates for the earlier years could have been achieved for the stocking rates of the later years, > 1,500 adult salmon would have returned.
1982
1987
1992
1997
2002
2007
YEAR
History of fry stocking, 1976-2012
SMOLT YEAR
2004 #/Unit
Watershed
Stocked
0+ Parr
1+ Parr
Age 1 Smolt
Age 2 Smolt
Total Smolt
Farmington Salmon
54 49
5.34 9.31
2.02 3.64
0.41 0.84
1.08 2.15
1.49 2.99
Eightmile
42
1.51
1.36
0.91
0.91
OBSERVATIONS ABOUT FRY STOCKING:

Most wild male parr matured in stream Sex ratio of fry-stocked adults ~ 75:25 As returns diminished, not enough SR males to achieve 1:1 Began using mature parr as broodstock; better than domestics. Much of Connecticut River habitat that was fry stocked was inaccessible to adults (most adults trapped for broodstock) or other anadromous species. Smolt production decreased in some northern streams over time. Were emigating smolts causing a net loss of nutrients to stream?
PARR STOCKING Never a prioritized strategy A waste product of smolt programs (bi-modality) stocked in fall perhaps worst time to introduce a hatchery fish possibly worst case scenario: stayed in hatchery long enough to pick up bad habits but still must stay in natural habitat for another year before emigating to sea. Most 0-year parr stockings have not resulted in 1-year parr populations. Based on scale reading, very few adult returns from parr stockings Penobscot River program had one or two years where mainstem parr stocking may have contributed to adult returns but hard to verify.
Over-winter mortality- a challenge for stocking both fry and parr some estimates are 64%!
Insert photosof Deerfield River and Rutans.
Winters are harsher in North America than parts of Europe

600
Returns of Atlantic Salmon to the Connecticut River

500
400
300
Number of Adults
200
100
YEAR
CONCLUSIONS:
1. Stocking salmon created a run where there previously was none. 2. Cost effectiveness of the stocking and ability to create a self-sustaining population remain unproven. 3. There are different risks for a true restoration program (native stock extirpated) and an enhancement program (trying to increase the number of salmon in a river.) 4. Success of smolt stocking is highly dependent on the quality of the fish. 5. Success of fry stocking is highly dependent on the quality of the habitat. 6. In the Connecticut River, there would have been more success if: (a) fewer dams [downstream passage], (b) better habitat, (c) not at the southern edge of the range, (d) no marine phase shift (climate change?). 7. Restoration requires many other important tasks in addition to stocking, like fish passage, habitat, water quality, harvest restriction. dam removal
Fishway construction
LESSONS LEARNED 1. Restoration of long-lost runs is a very difficult task 2. Choose origin of hatchery product carefully 3. Concentrate on product quality (physiology, health, fin condition, size) (dont let the tail wag the dog) 4. Be wary of well-water hatcheries 5. Riverine experience may be valuable to hatchery-reared smolts 6. Fry stocking can be successful in establishing parr populations 7. No significant difference between unfed and fed fry stocking 8. Maximize amount of habitat stocked with fry within most efficient range 9. Parr stocking not effective 10. Assess performance strive for improvement 11. Do not assume stocking can solve all problems

Steve Gephard (Inland Fisheries Division, Dept. of Energy and Environmental Protection, State of Connecticut) Overview

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Steve Gephard (Inland Fisheries Division, Dept. of Energy and Environmental Protection, State of Connecticut) Overview

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Stocking Salmon As a Means of Restoring Salmon Populations An Overview

CASE STUDY: The Connecticut River Restoration Program

Long Island Sound

mouth near southern extent of range

BASIC INFORMATION ABOUT THE PROGRAM

hatchery-based restoration program

Started with 2Smolt program shifted to 1Smolt program

New Brunswick (Miramichi)

Some > 1,000 km away and from much different biomes.

Conclusion- origin of donor stocks matters.

Gill Na+,K+-ATPase Activity (mol ADP mg protein -1 h-1)

Plasma growth hormone (ng ml-1)

Parr < 11 cm in Jan Smolt > 12 cm in Jan

Parr LDN Smolt LDN

(McCormick et al. 2008)

GILL Na,K-ATPase ACTIVITY (mol mg prot h )

PLASMA OSMOLALITY (ng ml )

PLASMA OSMOLALITY (mOsm) AFTER SEAWATER CHALLENGE

2 4 6 8 10 GILL Na,K-ATPase ACTIVITY (mol mg prot-1 h-1)

USE OF WELL-WATER HATCHERIES VS. SURFACE WATER HATCHERIES

Peak of stream-reared smolts much later

EFFECT OF SIZE ON SMOLTIFICATION

EFFECT OF SMOLT SIZE ON ADULT RETURN RATE

Adult Return Rate

Best size range for Connecticut River

set as hatchery objectives

Tracked for each raceway:

suggest managers set production goals in terms of quality

Return Rates for Hatchery-reared Smolts- Farmington River

Return Rate (%)

Volunteer-based fry stocking program

A FISH BEHIND EVERY ROCK STOCKING

Best Stage at Which to Stock?

Never sac fry!

Fed fry: up to 750 to the pound or ~ 350 to the kg.

Parr- a different subject

stocking more fry produces more fall parr up to a point.

History of fry stocking, 1976-2012

OBSERVATIONS ABOUT FRY STOCKING:

Insert photosof Deerfield River and Rutans.

Winters are harsher in North America than parts of Europe

Returns of Atlantic Salmon to the Connecticut River

Вам также может понравиться