~nvironmental requirements of coastal fishes and ... tr el-82-4 october 1983 species prof i 1 es :...

REFERENCE COPY Do Not Remove from the Librzr\r

U. S. Fish and Wildlife Servire National Wetlands Researrh Clzn%r

7nn P . I VV LU] UI I

n U U l r

FWSIOBS-82111.6 TR EL-82-4 October 1983 Lafayette, Louisiana 7Q50h

Species Profiles: Life Histories and ~nvironmental Requirements of Coastal Fishes and Invertebrates (Pacific Northwest)

CHINOOK SALMON

Coastal Ecology Group Fish and Wildlife Service Waterways Experiment Station U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

FWS/OBS-82/11.6 TR EL-82-4 October 1983

Species P ro f i 1 es : L i f e H i s t o r i e s and Env i ronrnental Requirements o f Coasta l F ishes and I n v e r t e b r a t e s ( P a c i f i c Nor thwest )

CHINOOK SALMON

Dav id A. Beauchamp, Michael F. Shepard and G i 1 b e r t 0. Pal l ley

Washington Cooperat ive F i s h e r y Research U n i t School o f F i s h e r i e s

U n i v e r s i t y o f Washington S e a t t l e , WA 98195

P r o j e c t Manager L a r r y Shanks

P r o j e c t O f f i c e r Norman Benson

Na t i ona l Coasta l Ecosystems Team U.S. F i s h and W i l d l i f e S e r v i c e

1010 Gause Boulevard S l i d e l l , LA 70458

Th i s s tudy was conducted i n coope ra t i on w i t h

Coasta l Ecology Group U.S. Army Corps o f Engineers Waterways Exper iment S t a t i o n

Performed f o r N a t i onal Coastal Ecosys terns Team

D i v i s i on o f Bi 01 og i c a l Serv ices F i sh and W i l d l i f e Se rv i ce

U.S. Department o f t h e I n t e r i o r Washi ngton , DC 20240

CONVERSION FACTORS

M e t r i c -- t o U.S. Customary

Mu1 t i p ly To O b t a i n -

m i 11 i m e t e r s (mm) c e n t i m e t e r s (cm) meters (m) k i l o m e t e r s (km)

i nches inches f e e t m i l e s

square meters (mi) square k i l o m e t e r s (km') h e c t a r e s (ha )

square f e e t square m i l e s a c r e s

1 i t e r s (1 ) c u b i c me te rs (m3) c u b i c meters

g a l 1 ons c u b i c f e e t a c r e - f e e t

mi 1 1 i grams (mg) grams (gm) k i 1 ograms ( k g ) m e t r i c t o n s (mt ) m e t r i c t o n s (mt ) k i l o c a l o r i e s ( k c a l )

ounces ounces pounds pounds s h o r t t o n s BTU

C e l s i u s degrees F a h r e n h e i t degrees

U.S. Customary - t o M e t r i c

i nc hes i nc hes f e e t ( f t ) f a thorns m i l e s (m i ) n a u t i c a l m i l e s (nmi )

m i 11 i m e t e r s c e n t i m e t e r s me te rs me te rs k i l o m e t e r s k i 1 ome t e r s

square f e e t ( f t ' ) a c r e s square m i l e s ( m i 2 )

square me te rs h e c t a r e s square k i 1 ometers

g a l l o n s (ga.1) c u b i c f e e t ( f t 3 ) a c r e - f e e t

1 i t e r s c u b i c me te rs c u b i c me te rs

ounces (02) pounds ( I b ) s h o r t t o n s ( t o n ) BTU

grams k i 1 ograms m e t r i c t o n s k i l o c a l o r i e s

F a h r e n h e i t degrees C e l s i u s degrees -

Page

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CONVERSIONTABLE ii PREFACE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i v

NOMENCLATURE/TAXONOMY/RANGE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 MORPHOLOGY/IDENTIFICATION AIDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 LIFE HISTORY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Spawning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 F e c u n d i t y . Eggs. and A l e v i n s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 F r y and Smolts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mar ine Stages 6 Growth C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 The F i s h e r y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

ECOLOGICALROLE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS 10

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Temperature 10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S a l i n i t y 10

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D i s s o l v e d O x y g e n 10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S u b s t r a t e 10

Depth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Water Movement 11

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . T u r b i d i t y 11 I

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . LITERATURECITED 12

PREFACE

T h i s s p e c i e s p r o f i l e i s one o f a s e r i e s on c o a s t a l a q u a t i c organ isms, p r i n c i p a l l y f i s h , o f s p o r t , commercia l , o r e c o l o g i c a l impor tance. The p r o f i l e s a r e designed t o p r o v i d e c o a s t a l managers, eng ineers , and b i o l o g i s t s w i t h a b r i e f comprehensive s k e t c h o f t h e b i o l o g i c a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and e n v i ronmental r e q u i r e - rnents o f t h e s p e c i e s and t o d e s c r i b e ho~r p o p u l a t i o n s o f t h e spec ies :nay be expected t o r e a c t t o e n v i ronmenta l changes caused by c o a s t a l devel opment. Each p r o f i l e has s e c t i o n s on taxonomy, 1 i f e h i s t o r y , e c o l o g i c a l r o l e , e n v i r o n ~ n e n t a l r e q u i rements, and economic impor tance, i f appl i c a b l e . A t h r e e - r i n g b i n d e r i s used f o r t h i s s e r i e s so t h a t new p r o f i l e s can be added as t h e y a r e prepared. T h i s p r o j e c t i s j o i n t l y p lanned and f i nanced by t h e U.S. Army Corps o f Eng ineers and t h e U.S. F i s h and W i l d l i f e S e r v i c e .

Suggest ions o r q u e s t i o n s r e g a r d i n g t h i s r e p o r t shou ld be d i r e c t e d t o :

I n f o r m a t i o n T r a n s f e r S p e c i a l i s t N a t i o n a l Coas ta l Ecosystems Team U.S. F i s h and W i l d l i f e S e r v i c e NASA-Sl i d e l 1 Computer Compl ex 1010 Gause Bou leva rd S l i d e l l , LA 70458

U.S. Army Eng ineer Waterways Exper iment S t a t i o n A t t e n t i o n : WESER P o s t O f f i c e Box 631 V icksburg , MS 39180

T h i s s e r i e s shou ld be r e f e r e n c e d as f o l lows:

U.S. F i s h and W i l d l i f e Se rv i ce . 1983. Spec ies p r o f i l e s : l i f e h i s t o r i e s and env i ronmen ta l r e q u i rements o f c o a s t a l f i s h e s and i n v e r t e b r a t e s . 11.5. F i s h and W i I d 1 i f e Serv i ce , D i v i s i o n o f B i 01 o g i c a l Se rv i ces , FWS/OBS-82/11. U.S. Army Corps o f Eng ineers , TR EL-82-4.

T h i s p r o f i l e shou ld be c i t e d as f o l l o w s :

Beauchamp, D.A., M.F. Shepard, and G.B. Pau ley . 1983. Spec ies p r o f i l e s : l i f e h i s t o r i e s and e n v i r o n m e n t a l r e q u i r e m e n t s o f c o a s t a l f i s h e s and i n v e r t e - b r a t e s ( P a c i f i c Nor thwes t ) - - c h i n o o k salmon. U.S. F i s h and W i l d l i f e S e r v i c e , D i v i s i o n o f B i o l o g i c a l S e r v i c e s , FWS/OBS-82/11.6. U. S. Army Corps o f Eng ineers , TR EL-82-4. 15 pp.

F i g u r e I. Chinook salmon.

CHINOOK SALMON

S c i e n t i f i c name..

O the r common names.. ...... Ki ng salmon, t yee , s p r i n g , b lackmouth (Haw and Buck1 ey 1973)

C l a s s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O s t e i c h t h y e s .................... Order . Sal rnoni formes ...................... Fami l y . Sal monidae

Geographic range : Anadromous i n 1 a r g e r r i v e r s f rom San F r a n c i s c o Bay n o r t h t o A r c t i c wa te rs o f Alaska, Canada, and t h e S o v i e t Un ion. P o p u l a t i o n s occu r i n As ia as f a r s o u t h as t h e i s l a n d s o f Japan. Freshwater popul a ti ons have been i n t r o d u c e d i n t o t h e G r e a t Lakes. F la jor r i v e r s s u p p o r t i ng c h i nook salmon runs i n t h e N o r t h w e s t Paci f i c b i ogeograph ica l r e g i o n a r e shown i n F i g u r e 2. M i g r a t i o n p a t t e r n s a r e shown i n F i g u r e 3.

MORPHOLOGY/IDENTIFICATION AIDS'

Morpho logy: D o r s a l f i n (10-14 r a y s ) , a d i p o s e s t o u t and f l e s h y , ana l ( 1 3 - 9 ) , p e l v i c ( l o ) , abdominal w i t h a f r e e - t i p p e d f l e s h y appendage above i t s i n s e r t i o n . C y c l o i d s c a l e s . G i l l r a k e r s (18-30) rough and w i d e l y spaced on f i r s t g i l l a r c h . Body e l o n g a t e , moder- a t e , l a t e r a l compress ion.

I d e n ti f i ca t i on a i d s : Tai 1 m o d e r a t e l y f o r k e d wi t h s t i f f o u t e r r a y s . Moderate1 y 1 a rge i r r e g u l a r b l ac k s p o t s on back, upper s i d e s , d o r s a l , a d i pose, and b o t h l o b e s o f t h e caudal f i n . Bl ac k 1 ower gum1 i ne. Juven i 1 es : P a r r marks appear as l o n g v e r t i c a l d a r k b a r s e x t e n d i ny e q u a l l y above and be1 ow t h e 1 a t e r a l 1 i ne. P a r r marks a r e w i d e r than o r equa l t o t h e w i d t h o f spaces be tween marks . 1 E x t r a c t e d f r o m H a r t (1973) .

M I L E S

K I L O M E T E R S

Major ocean distribution

PACIFIC GCEAN

F i g u r e 2. Ma jo r r i v e r s and c o a s t a l a reas s u p p o r t i n g ch inook salmon i n t h e Paci f i c Nor thwes t .

F i g u r e 3. M i g r a t i o n p a t t e r n s of ch inook salmon f rom s o u t h e r n B r i t i s h Columbia t o n o r t h e r n Cal i f o r n i a ( f rom Washington S t a t e Department o f F i s h e r i e s 1959).

3

LIFE HISTORY

Spawning

Chinook s a l hwn (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) e x h i b i t a t mm d i s t i r ~ c t 1 i f e h i s t o r y pa t t e rns . Spr ing c h i nook salmon popul a t i ons occur i n l a r g e r i v e r systems where enough f l o w - is a v a i l a b l e over t he summer t o h o l d these f i s h . Spr ing - run f i s h may e n t e r f reshwate r as e a r l y as February o r March, b u t they u s u a l l y spawn between August and November. These f i s h t r a v e l upstream s l ow l y and remain f o r p r o t r a c t e d pe r i ods i n poo l s near t h e spawning grounds (Hodges and G h a r r e t t 1949; B r i g g s 1953) and t y p i - c a l l y spawn i n t h e upper reaches o f r i v e r s . Summer c h i nook salmon e n t e r t h e r i v e r s f rom l a t e s p r i n g th rough midsummer and h o l d i n the r i v e r u n t i 1 they spawn i n the f a l l . F a l l - r u n c h i - nook salmon e n t e r bo th l a r g e r i v e r s and smal l coas ta l streams i n autumn. They genera l l y move r a p i d l y d u r i n g h i g h wate r pe r i ods t o t h e spawning areas and commence spawning a c t i v i t i e s (B r i ggs 1953). Compl e t ~ ! spawni ng nor- m a l l y occurs w i t h i n 7 days a f t e r the i n i t i a l breeding a c t i v i t y . Males a r e a t t r a c t e d by females d i g g i n g and t e s t i n g t h e g rave l . When t h e female i s s a t i s f i e d w i t h her excava t i on s i t e , spawning proceeds. The female depos- i t s a p o r t i o n o f he r ova i n t he g rave l depress ion w h i l e one pr i rnary male and p o s s i b l y severa l subdomi nan t males move a l ongs ide simu1 taneous ly t o f e r t i l i z e t h e eggs. F o l l o w i n g each o f these spawning ac ts , t h e female moves d i r e c t - l y upstream t o d i g a new depression, which a l s o covers t h e eggs f e r t i l i z e d i n t h e p reced ing ac t . B r i ggs (1953) r e p o r t e d t h a t t h e average depth o f pro- d u c t i v e redds was 203 mm ( 8 inches) t o 356 mm (14 inches) beneath t h e su r f ace o f t h e stream bed. Columbia R i ve r c h i - nook cons t ruc ted redds f rom 1.2 rn ( 4 f t ) t o 10.7 m (35 f t ) i n d iameter (Chapman 1943). Nest bu i 1 d i ng commenc- es e a r l i e s t i n t h e uppermost reaches o f t h e r i v e r and progresses s e q u e n t i a l l y downstream as r i v e r temperatures drop t o t he l e v e l s encountered by t he up- s t ream spawners (Mat tson 1948; Cramer and Hammack 1952). When females have

expended t h e i r oba, the males d e s e r t them and apparen t l y search f o r add i - t i o n a l mat ings u n t i l they a r e spawned ou t o r d i e . Chinook slamon 1 i v e 2 t o 4 weeks a f t e r spawning. Dur ing t h i s t ime, fena les w i l l defend t h e i r redds

3 and an area as wide as 6 . 1 rn ( 2 0 f t ) beyond t he margin o f the redd a g a i n s t o t h e r females, b u t they w i 11 no rma l l y i g n o r e male ch inook salrnon (B r i ggs 1953).

Fecund i t y , Eggs, and A1 -- e v i ns

Femal e c h i nook s a l mon produce 3,000 t o 6,000 eggs. Fecund i t y i s s i z e r e - l a t e d , and h i ghe r i n sou thern popula- t i o n s . Chinook salmon eggs a re t h e 1 a r g e s t o f t he Sal moni dae (Rounsefel 1 1957). The eggs r e q u i r e an average o f 882 t o 991 temperature u n i t s f o r ha tch - i n g ( 1 temperature u n i t = 1 degree Fah renhe i t above f r e e z i n g f o r a p e r i o d o f 24 hou rs ) , w i t h fewer temperature u n i t s r e q u i r e d f o r eggs incuba ted a t l ower temperatures (McKee 1950). Dur- i ng t h e i n c u b a t i o n per iod , s u b s t a n t i a l m o r t a l i t y may be i n c u r r e d by redd d i s - turbances f rom overspawni ng, f l u c t u a t - i n g f l ows , dewater ing, f r eez i ng , i s o - l a t i o n , s u f f o c a t i o n , and m i c r o b i a l

3 i n f e s t a t i o n . Depending upon t h e tem- p e r a t u r e regime o f t h e n a t a l stream, eggs ha tch i n t h e l a t e f a l l o r e a r l y w i n t e r . The a l e v i n s remain i n the g rave l f o r 4 t o 6 weeks u n t i l t h e y o l k sac i s absorbed ( M o t t l e y 1929; D i l l 1968). The a l e v i n s a re i n i t i a l l y n e g a t i v e l y p h o t o t a c t i c and m i g r a t e downward i n t o t h e g rave l . High C02 l e v e l s may e l i c i t a d i s p e r s a l response w i t h i n t he g rave l . When t h e y o l k sac i s n e a r l y absorbed, t he a l e v i n s beg in t o express p o s i t i v e r h e o t a x i s ( D i l l 1968). A f t e r y o l k absorp t ion , young c h i nook sal.,lon g e n e r a l l y emerge a f t e r dark as free-swimming f r y .

F r y and Smol t s

F r y spend 1 t o 18 months i n f r e s h - water . Some f r y m i g r a t e seaward imme- d i a t e l y a f t e r emergence w h i l e o t h e r s l i v e i n t h e stream f o r about a y e a r be fo re m i g r a t i n g downstream (Mo ttl ey 1929). N ine ty pe rcen t o f t h e j u v e n i l e chinook f rom the Sacramento R i ve r

3

m i g r a t e downstream f rom t h e m idd le o f January t o t h e m idd le o f March, and most e n t e r s a l t w a t e r by June o f t h e i r f i r s t y e a r ( 6 t o 10 months f o l l o w i n g spawning) a t an average l e n g t h o f 4 1 mm (1.6 i nches ) . Downstream f a 1 1 m ig ran ts , i n c l u d i n g b o t h f a l l - and s p r i ng- run j uven i 1 es , reach sa l twa te r a t an average l e n g t h o f 100 ~ n m (3 .9 i nches ) accord ing t o M o t t l e y (1929). I n B r i t i s h Columbia, 78% o f t h e c h i - nook salmon m ig ra te t o sea as f r y w h i l e t h e ren ia in ing 22% e n t e r s a l t w a t e r as year1 i n g s ( P r i t c h a r d 1940). Some c h i - nook popu la t i ons , p a r t i c u l a r l y f rom coas ta l streams, l e i s u r e l y feed and m i g r a t e downstream r a t h e r than 1 i v i ng i n d i s t i n c t reaches o f t h e r i v e r f o r extended pe r i ods of t ime. Sp r i ng chinook salmon from t h e upper reaches o f l a r g e r i v e r s , such as t h e Columbia, e x h i b i t t h e more f a m i l i a r yea r - l ong f r eshwa te r r e a r i n g stage. Chapman and B jo rnn (1968) r e p o r t e d t h a t i n warmer months, young chinook a r e assoc ia ted w i t h v e l o c i t i e s and depths i n p ropor - t i o n t o body s ize , s h i f t i n g t o f as te r , deeper wa te rs as they grow. Chinook a r e p r i m a r i l y d r i f t and b e n t h i c feeders . Du r i ng t h e day t h e f i s h remain i n a smal l home area. A t n i g h t they s e t t l e t o t h e bottom, u s u a l l y a f t e r moving inshore. I n e a r l y autumn, juve- n i l e chinook salmon emig ra te downstream f rom t h e t r i b u t a r i e s t o o v e r w i n t e r i n l a r g e r streams, o f t e n 1 i v i n g i n t h e subs t ra te . Stream temperatures o f 4.4"C (39.9"F) t o 5.5"C (41.9"F) func - t i o n as cues f o r t h i s h i d i n g behav io r i n t he subs t ra te . Winter cover, espe- c i a l l y l a r g e rocks, i s i m p o r t a n t i n h o l d i n g o v e r w i n t e r i n g f i s h . Juveni 1 e chinook salmon p r e f e r deeper wa te r w i t h sma l l e r subs t ra te p a r t i c l e s than do s tee lhead (Chapman and B jo rnn 1968).

Chinook salmon m i g r a t i o n s i n t o es- t u a r i e s a r e c o r r e l a t e d w i t h per iods o f h i gh d ischarge and t u r b i d i t y , and m i - g r a t i o n i s normal l y heav ies t a t n i g h t (Reimers 1968; Dav is 1981). These m i - g r a t i o n s occur p r i n i a r i l y d u r i n g s p r i n g and e a r l y summer, b u t con t inue a t low- n e r l e v e l s through f a l l . F i s h e n t e r i n g t h e es tua ry range f rom 35 mn (1.4 i n c h - es) t o 160 mm (6.3 i n c h e s ) accord ing

t o severa l au tho rs ( R i c h 1920; G h a r r e t t and Hodges 1950; Mains and Smi th 1964; B a r r a c l ough 1967 ; Davi s 1981 ) . The l a r g e r j u v e n i l e s t end t o m ig ra te e a r l i - e r and growth inc reases i n b r a c k i s h e s t u a r i ne wa te rs (R ich 1920). Spa t i a1 d i s t r i b u t i o n o f j u v e n i 1 e c h i nook w i t h - i n an es tuary may be s i z e dependent, w h i l e schoo l i ng i n an es tua ry may be i n f l u e n c e d by f r i g h t e l i c i t e d i n t h e f i s h due t o t i d a l c yc l es and wave a c t i o n (Reimers 1968).

E s t u a r i n e res idence t imes may be i n f l u e n c e d by t h e occurrence o f f a1 1 f r eshe t s , p o p u l a t i o n abundance, and va r i ous e s t u a r i n e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ; d u r a t i o n and t i m i n g o f e s t u a r i n e res idence vary geographica l l y w i t h seasonal d i f f e rences ( M i 1 l e r e t a1 . 1967; Reimers 1968; Sims 1970; S i b e r t 1975). Chinook salmon i n t h e S k a g i t R i v e r Estuary occupied t h e i n n e r e s t u - a r i n e s a l t marshes f o r 2 t o 3 days before em ig ra t i ng f a r t h e r o u t i n t h e es tua ry . The 1 a rger srnol t s , g r e a t e r than 46 mm (1.8 inches) , spent ap- p rox ima te l y a day l e s s i n t h e s a l t marsh than d i d t h e sma l l e r f i s h . Smolts congregated i n t i d a l streams a t low t i d e , w i t h t h e m a j o r i t y o f f i s h observed i n deep, slow wate r ove r s o f t subs t ra tes . The h i g h e s t chinook s a l - mon d e n s i t i e s occu r red i n t i d a l streams w i t h o u t any f reshwater i n f l u e n c e (Shepard 1981).

P re fe rence f o r s o f t , packed sub- s t r a t e was a1 so documented by Miyamoto e t a l . (1980). These au thors suggest- ed t h a t t h e abundance of t h e ep iben- t h i c prey fauna i n t h a t t ype o f hab i - t a t a t t r a c t e d j u v e n i l e chinook. I n t he Fianaimo R i ve r Estuary, Healey (1980) found ch inook salmon i n water a few cen t ime te r s t o o v e r a meter deep ove r g rave l , ;and, and mud subs t ra tes . Where an ex tens i ve e s t u a r i n e env i ran - ment e x i s t s , j u v e n i l e chinook w i l l r e - s i d e t h e r e f o r up t o 2 months (Sa lo 1969; Sims 1970; Healey 1980). W i t h i n e s t u a r i e s and bays, j uven i l e chinook salmon u t i 1 i z e shore1 i ne areas ex ten- s i v e l y . Meyer e t a l . (1980) p resen ted da ta sugges t ing t h a t sma l l e r f i s h u t i - l i z e t h e i n s h o r e areas w h i l e l a r g e r ones occupy deeper waters . J u v e n i l e

chinook salmon i n S i m i l k Bay p r i m a r i l y occupy the sur face waters (93.8%) w h i l e a few (1.8%) extend down t o 18.3 m (60.0 f t ) according t o Stober e t a l . (1973). I n r i v e r systems w i t h h igh f l u s h i n g r a t e s r e l a t i v e t o t he amount o f e x i s t i n g es tua r i ne hab i ta t , juve- n i l e s may move q u i c k l y through the mouth o f t h e r i v e r and i n t o t he rece iv - i n g marine waters. From work on the Snohomi sh River , T y l e r (1963) hypothe- s i zed t h a t f i s h c a r r i e d i n midstream have l i t t l e chance t o con tac t t h e sho re l i ne and are c a r r i e d o f f s h o r e by s t r o n g r i v e r and t i d a l c u r r e n t s du r i ng ebb t i d e . M i l l e r e t a l . (1967) observed j u v e n i l e chinook salmon i n severa l nearshore hab i ta t s , inshore f rom the 20-m (65 .6- f t ) depth l e v e l , between mid-May and September i n Puget Sound.

Du r ing es tua r i ne rear ing , c h i nook salmon e x h i b i t s i g n i f i c a n t growth. Salo (1969) ca l cua l t e d a minimum growth es t imate o f 2.6 mn (0.1 i nch ) per week f o r j u v e n i l e s i n t he Duwami sh R ive r Es- tuary. Shepard (1981) i nd i cated min i - mum growth est imates o f 1.5% o f f o r k l e n g t h per day f o r j u v e n i l e chinook salmon i n t he Skag i t R iver Estuary. Th is s p u r t o f growth be fore e n t e r i n g t h e marine environment may be v i t a l t o t he subsequent e a r l y marine s u r v i v a l o f j u v e n i l e chinook salmon. For a more. ex tens ive review o f es tua r i ne requirements and u t i l i z a t i o n by juve- n i l e chinook salmon, r e f e r t o Shepard (1981).

Marine Staqes

Upon l e a v i n g the r i v e r s o f Oregon, Washington, and B r i t i s h Columbia, juve- n i l e chinook salmon move up the coas t i n a nor thwester ly d i r e c t i o n ( P r i t cha rd 1940). Th i s m ig ra t i on i s a r e l a t i v e l y slow feed ing and d ispersa l movement w i t h d is tance from t h e na ta l stream i n - c reas ing w i t h age. Sacramento R ive r chinook a re caught o f f t he Washington and Oregon coast w h i l e Columbia R ive r chinook a re c o l l e c t e d as f a r n o r t h as Alaska and as f a r south as San Fran- c i sco, Cal i f o r n i a (Ha l lock e t a l . 1952; Washi ng ton Sta te Department o f F i sh- e r i e s 1959). For chinook salmon migra-

t i o n pa t te rns between B r i t i s h Columbia and C a l i f o r n i a , see F igure 3. P r i t - chard (1940) found t h a t Columbia R iver f i s h dominate the catch along the west coast o f t he Queen C h a r l o t t e Is lands , and t h a t t he Fraser R i ve r f i s h rep lace the Columbia R iver stocks n o r t h o f t he Queen C h a r l o t t e Is lands. They remain i n t he marine environment between 1 and 6 years w i t h t he average be ing 3 o r 4 years. P r i t c h a r d (1940) ob ta ined age and d i s t r i b u t i o n data from var ious coas ta l waters from the mouth o f t h e Columbia R ive r t o t he Queen C h a r l o t t e I s 1 ands. Ce r ta in races o f chinook salmon, such as the Puget Sound b lackmouth, tend t o remain i n l o c a l marine areas (Junge and B a y l i f f 1955). Two- t o f ive-year-01 d c h i nook salmon com- p r i s e d t h e bulk o f t h e t r o l l ca tch i n t h e nearshore areas, w h i l e t he o f f - shore catches were dominated by 5- and 6-year-01 d f i s h . M i 1 ne (1957) r e p o r t - ed t h a t chinook salmon captured i n t h e o u t e r waters o f B r i t i s h Columbia were on l o n g spawning migra t ions , t r a v e l i ng southeast a1 ong the Conti nen ta l She1 f. P r i tchard (1940) s ta ted t h a t t he r e - t u r n m ig ra t i on was f a i r l y r a p i d i n com- pa r i son t o t h e feed ing o r d ispersa l m igra t ion .

One- and two-year-01 d c h i nook s a l - mon i n t h e S t r a i t s o f Georgia were caught from the sur face down t o 30 m (98 f t ) w i t h t h e m a j o r i t y occupying t h e deeper water (Mo t t l ey 1929). I n southeast A1 aska, c h i nook salmon r e s i d e i n marine waters throughout t he year, feed ing a t r e l a t i v e l y shal low depths i n the sp r i ng and summer and occupying deeper waters 60-80 m (197 - 262 f t ) i n t h e w i n t e r (Cobb 1910).

Sal mon spawning m i g ra t i ons are e l i c i t e d by environmental cues, such as temperature o r sa l i n i t y , 01 f a c t i o n , c e l e s t i a l nav iga t ion , and magnetic o r i - e n t a t i o n (Brannon, i n press) . The t i m - i n g o f t h i s m i g r a t i o n i s innate, w h i l e the l o c a t i o n o r d e s t i n a t i o n o f t he m i - g r a t i o n i s l earned through impr in t i ng . The numerous t h e o r i e s which have been advanced t o expl a i n sa l moni d homi ng a re discussed i n d e t a i l i n Brannon ( i n press) .

Growth Charac ter i s t i c s

Chinook f r y emerge from t h e gravel du r i ng the w in te r , and some w i l l m i - (n g r a t e t o sea a f t e r t h e f i r s t month when about 30 mm (1.2 inches) long. Some s p r i n g chinook popu la t ions e n t e r s a l t - water as year1 ings a t leng ths exceed- i n g 100 mm (3.9 inches). O'Connor (1977) ob ta ined growth data from numerous authors and presented t h e data i n a t a b l e o f l eng ths and weights f o r ages 1 through 5 (Table 1) .

The F ishery

Chinook salmon represent an ex- t remely impor tan t component o f bo th t he commercial and s p o r t f i s h e r i e s o f t he P a c i f i c Northwest. Char ter boat f i s h e r i e s e x i s t a long t h e P a c i f i c coast f rom San Francisco t o Alaska. Chinook an? coho salmon support extensive t r o l l f i s h e r i e s over the same 1 a t i tudes, b u t t r o l l e r s a d d i t i o n a l l y f i s h w e l l o u t i n - t o t he F ishery Conservat ion Zone (3-200 m i o f f sho re ) . Nearshore and te rmina l area f i s h e r i e s a re conducted w i t h purse seines and g i l l nets, and i n - n r i v e r s e t n e t f i s h e r i e s are a1 lowed by t r e a t y - I n d i a n f ishermen i n most r i v e r drainages.

For r i v e r f i s h e r i e s , Chapman (1940) o f f e r e d t h i s eva lua t i on o f t he var ious races o f Columbia R iver chinook s a l - mon: s p r i n g f i s h entered t h e r i v e r i n A p r i l and May w i t h a small average s i z e b u t w i t h h igh q u a l i t y f l esh ; summer f i s h were l a r g e and h igh qual i t y f i s h t h a t entered t h e r i v e r i n June and J u l y ; and f a l l f i s h were la rge , poor qual i t y f i s h t h a t entered the sys- tem between August and October. From 1876 t o 1886, t he Columbia R ive r A p r i l - J u l y f i s h e r y produced an average o f 3.1 ~ i i . i l l i o n k i lograms (6.8 m i l l i o n pounds) o f salmon per year (Chapman 1940), b u t s ince then has c o n t i n u a l l y dec l ined t o where on l y t r e a t y - I n d i a n f ishermen cur - r e n t l y ha rves t f i s h i n t h e r i v e r .

To ta l Un i ted States commerci a1 catches o f chinook salmon f rom 1930 t o 1980 have been summarized by t o t a l annual catch and t o t a l catch value (Table 2). These catch s t a t i s t i c s c l e a r l y i n -

d i c a t e a dec l i ne i n t he commercial ca tch o f chinook salmon over time. De- s p i t e t h i s dec l ine , i n f l a t i o n more than t r i p 1 ed the va lue o f t he ca tch between 1970 and 1980. A1 though chinook salmon represent on ly 9% t o 13% o f t h e t o t a l commercial salmon catch, they are t h e most impor tan t i n terms o f market va lue and preference. T ro l l - caugh t f r e s h o r f resh- f rozen chinook salmon i n t h e 11- 18 l b (4.9-8.2 kg) s i z e range a re the most h i g h l y p r e f e r r e d salmon by market buyers. Among t h e P a c i f i c States and Provinces, B r i t i s h Columbia c o n t r i b u t e d t h e l a r g e s t percentage (27%) o f t he chinook commercial and s p o r t ca tch f o r t he yea rs 1953-1957 (F igu re 4).

F igu re 4. Percentage c o n t r i b u t i o n o f each P a c i f i c Coast S ta te and B r i t i s h Columbia t o t he chinook salmon f i s h e r y f o r a l l types o f commercial and s p o r t gear combined, 1953-1957 (Washington S t a t e Department o f F i s h e r i e s 1959).

Chinook salmon are h i g h l y p r i z e d s p o r t f i s h due t o t h e i r t rophy s ize, tremendous f i g h t i n g qual i t i e s , and ex- c e l l e n t t a b l e fare. Various at tempts a t q u a n t i f y i n g the va lue o f a recrea- t i o n a l l y caught f i s h o f t e n i n c l u d e c o s t of t r anspo r ta t i on , lodging, o t h e r work o r r e c r e a t i o n a l o p p o r t u n i t i e s foregone, and equipment. Persons pur- chasing a cha r te rboa t r e s e r v a t i o n may

Table 1. S ize ( w i t h m a t u r i t y ) f o r va r i ous f a l l chinook salmon s tocks f r om C a l i f o r n i a t o Alaska a t t h e end o f each growing season ( f r om 0 'Connor 1977).

Fork l eng thd (cm) a t end o f y e a r Author 1 2 3 4 5 Matu r i t v

F rase r (1920) 27.3 42.2 60.4 77.0 93.0 Years 2-5 Snyder (1923) ---- 32.0 55.0 73.0 ---- A1 1 Pa rke r and

K i r kness (1956) 25.4 48.3 68.6 87.6 104.1 M i xed Parker and

L a r k i n (1959) 18.1 52.8 70.4 84.6 95.5 Years 2-5 Junge and Phinney

(1963) ---- 49.5 80.0 95.2 ---- A1 1 Van Hyning (1973) 30.5 53.3 71.1 83.8 ---- Unknown Parks (1975) 25.4 53.3 72.4 88.9 99.1 Unknown

Round we igh t (kg) a t end o f y e a r

Newton (1972) ---- 4.54 5.90 9.07 12.24 Unknown Van Hyning (1973) 0.54 2.27 5.22 8.44 ----- Unknown Parks (1975) 0.18 2.04 5.53 10.79 15.33 Unknown

a ~ r a z e r (1920) used t o t a l l eng th , by s c a l e method.

Tab le 2. Catches and va lues o f t h e U n i t e d S ta tes commercial c h i nook salmon f i s h e r y , 1930-1980. (Based on Na t i ona l Mar ine F i s h e r i e s Se rv i ce 1977, 1981).

Year Annual catcha Annual va l ueb

a ~ a t c h i n m i l l i o n s o f pounds. b ~ a l u e i n m i l l i o n s o f d o l l a r s .

spend $40-$60 i n expec ta t i on o f land- i n g a f i s h . Most b i o l o g i s t s and econo- m i s t s agree t h a t spor t -caught salmon In represen t a much h ighe r va lue p e r pound than do commerc ia l ly landed f i s h .

Salmon f i s h e r i e s management i s an ext remely complex problem due t o user - group a l l o c a t i o n s and m i xed-stock and mixed-age f i s h e r i e s . Optimum y i e l d i s the des i r ed management goal f o r t h i s f i shery. Wr ight (1981) o f f e r s an excel 1 en t ove rv i ew o f c u r r e n t Paci f i c salmon f i s h e r i e s management approaches. Ocean f i s h e r i e s a re managed by a ca t ch quota, w h i l e t e rm ina l area f i s h e r i e s a r e managed by s u b t r a c t i n g escapement goals f rom pre-season r u n forecasts , which a re updated throughout t h e season. Th i s y i e l d s t he t o t a l a l l owab le harves t , which must be a1 l o c a t e d among t h e user groups i nvol ved. I n d i v i d u a l chinook salmon s tocks can be i d e n t i f i e d by s tudy ing t h e f i n e s t r u c t u r e o f t h e sca les (Rogers and Myers 1981a). Stocks a r e a r t i f i c i a l l y i d e n t i f i e d by ex tens i ve coded w i r e t a g g i ng programs. Chi nook salmon o f Canadian and U n i t e d S t a t e s o r i g i n o f t e n a r e i n t e r c e p t e d on t he h i g h seas by Japanese motherships. These f i s h a r e p r i m a r i l y taken as imma- t u r e f i s h i n t he western P a c i f i c Ocean and B e r i ng Sea. Es t imated i n c i d e n t a l ca tch o f chinook salmon by f o r e i g n t r a w l vessels was about 113,000 f i s h i n 1981 (Rogers and Myers 1981b).

ECOLOGICAL ROLE

J u v e n i l e chinook a re c h a r a c t e r i z e d as o p p o r t u n i s t i c d r i f t and b e n t h i c feeders, p r i m a r i l y e a t i n g i n s e c t s i n t h e s t ream-rear ing phase o f l i f e . Dur- i n g t h i s t ime, chinook salmon a re most c l o s e l y assoc ia ted w i t h j uven i 1 e s t e e l - head and r e s i d e n t t r o u t . Chapman and B jo rnn (1968) i ndi ca ted t h a t i n te rac - t i o n f o r space between species i s m i n i - mized by d i f f e r i n g spawning and emergence t imes. D i s t r i b u t i o n c l o s e t o h i g h - v e l o c i t y wa te r i s l a r g e l y food r e - l a t e d . Age 0 chinook salmon d i s t r i b u t e themsel ves bo th v e r t i c a l l y and ho r i zon - t a l l y t o a d j u s t t o food supply. Densi- ty w i t h i n s u i t a b l e h a b i t a t i s s o c i a l l y c o n t r o l l ed , w i t h t h e g r e a t e s t d i s t r i - b u t i o n a l r o l e o f s o c i a l behav io r b e i n g

p layed among f i s h o f near-equal s i ze . Du r i ng t h e day t h e f i s h remain i n a small home area, and a t n i g h t s e t t l e t o t h e bottom, u s u a l l y a f t e r moving inshore. The j uven i 1 es. apparen t l y subord i nate m i n imal space r e q u i rements t o e x p l o i t pe r i ods o f shor t - te rm food abundance. Juveni 1 e c h i nook salmon p r e f e r deeper water w i t h sma l l e r sub- s t r a t e p a r t i c l e s than do steelhead.

Upon e n t e r i n g t h e es tuary , chinook u t i l i z e a wide range o f i n v e r t e b r a t e prey whi 1 e r e t a i n i ng t h e i r i n s e c t i v o r - ous f eed ing hab i t s . Gammarid amphi- pods, i nsec t s , mysids, isopods, copepods, and f i s h l a r v a e comprise t he bu l k o f t h e e s t u a r i n e j u v e n i l e chinook s a l - mon d i e t (Dunfo rd 1975; L ipovsky 1977; Meyer e t a l . 1980). Accord ing t o L i povsky (1977), prey preference may be r e l a t e d t o s ize , t ime o f year , tempera- t u re , s a l i n i t y , and l o c a t i o n i n t he r i v e r .

As t h e young chinook salmon grow and move f a r t h e r i n t o t h e marine e n v i - ronment. t h e i r d i e t i n c l u d e s c rab zoea, P a c i f i c sand 1 ance (Ammodytes hexap- t e r u s ) , eu l achon (Tha le i ch thys p a c i f i - CUS), copepods, euphausi ds, cephalo- SS, isopods, and amphi pods (Bar ra - c l ough 1967; ~ o b i n s o n e t a i . 1968). I n l a t e w i n t e r and e a r l y s p r i n g o f f San Franc isco, chinook salmon feed on her- r i n g , r o c k f i s h , o t h e r f i s h , c rab megalops , and squid. Euphausids and squid, and l a t e r , h e r r i n g , c rab megalops, and r o c k f i s h comprise t he s p r i n g d i e t . I n 1 a t e s p r i n g through summer, r o c k f i s h dominate t h e d i e t , d i s t a n t l y f o l lowed by o t h e r f i s h e s and some i nve r teb ra tes . Anchovies a r e t h e dominant d i e t i t e m f o r t h e remainder o f t h e year . Merkel (1957) summarized t h i s by say ing c h i - nook salmon p r i m a r i l y e a t f i s h , except d u r i n g t h e s p r i n g when i n v e r t e b r a t e s (espec ia l l y euphausids ) a r e ext remely abundant. Chi nook salmon f r e q u e n t t he wate rs o f sou theas t A1 aska th roughout t h e y e a r and f eed h e a v i l y on h e r r i n g , smelt, and eu l achon. Du r i ng t h e w i n t e r they move deeper and feed on h a l i b u t , r o c k f i s h , cod, and c,topi (Cobb 1910).

Predato rs o f j uven i 1 e c h i nook s a l - mon i n c l u d e osDrev (Pard ion h a l i a e - t u s ) , k i ng f i she& ( ~ e i a m a lcyon) , mergansers (Mergus sp. ) , t e r n s ( S t e r n a sp. ) , s q u a w f i s h ~ t y c h o c h e i 1 us orego- nens is 1. l a r a e r salmon. t r o u t . char. walleye' ( ~ t i G s t e d i o n v; treum) ,' 1 a r g e i mou t h bass ( ~ i c r o p t e r u s m d e s ) - , and smal lmouth bass ( M i c r o ~ t e r u s do lo - mieu i ) . E s t u a r i ne and mari ne p reda to rs i n c l ude f i sh -ea t i ng b i r d s , p e l ag i c f ishes, k i l l e r whales (Orc inus o r ca ) , sea ls (Phoca sp. and C a l m s s p . ) , sea 1 i o n s Z a l o ~ h u s ca l i f o r n i a n u s and - - ~

Eumatopi us j u b a t a ) , a n d humans. Adul t chinook s a w r e t u r n i n g t o t h e i r streams o f o r i g i n encounter bears, seals , and o t h e r l a r g e carn ivorous mam- mals and b i r d s which p rey on them t o some degree. P reda t i on on young s a l - mon by f i s h i n f reshwater has been r e - viewed (Bennet t 1979; Brown and Moyle 1981; Pauley 1982).

Ames (1981) has observed a number o f nega t i ve c o r r e l a t i o n s o f abundance s h i f t s among the f i v e species o f s a l - mon i n Puget Sound and concluded t h a t t he bu l k o f t h i s i n t e r a c t i o n occu r red i n t he e a r l y marine stages.

ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS

Temperature

Accord ing t o Re iser and B jo rnn (1979), the recommended temperatures f o r spawning o f chinook salmon ranges between 5.6"C (42.1°F) and 13.g°C (57.0°F). Chinook salmon eggs can incuba te s u c c e s s f u l l y a t temperatures from j u s t above f r e e z i n g t o 10.O°C (50.0°F) w i t h o u t s i g n i f i c a n t m o r t a l i t y (Olson and Fos te r 1955). The recommended i ncuba t i on temperatures range between 5.0°C (41.0°F) and 14.4"C (57.g°F), accord ing t o Reiser and B jo rnn (1979). Seymour (1956) con- c luded t h a t t he optimum temperature f o r chinook eggs and f r y i s l l . O ° C (51.8"F) and f o r f i nge r l i ngs 17.0°C (62.6"F). B r e t t (1957) determined t h a t smal l chinook salmon were more vu l nerab l e t o h i gh temperatures than 1 arge f i s h . Adul t s p r i n g chinook can s u r v i v e i n deep poo ls i n t h e summer w i t h t h e su r f ace temperature 23 .O°C

(73.4"F), b u t cannot spawn above 22.0°C (71.G°F) (Mat tson 1948; Hodges and G h a r r e t t 1949). B r e t t (1957) i n - d i c a t e d t h a t t h e upper l e t h a l tempera- t u r e f o r chinook salmon was 25.1°C (77.2"F).

Sal i n i ty

J u v e n i l e c h i nook salmon encounter a wide range i n s a l i n i t y when moving f rom f reshwater through an es tuary and i n t o t h e marine env i ronment. E s t u a r i e s nor- m a l l y ma in ta i n a f reshwater l e n s above ' the area o f s a l t w a t e r i n t r u s i o n t h a t smol t s t end t o occupy du r i ng t h e i n i - t i a l stages o f t h e i r e s t u a r i n e and ma- r i n e residence. Robinson e t a l . (1968) found chinook salmon assoc ia ted w i t h s a l i n i t i e s f rom 6.75 t o 25.73 p p t i n t h e S t r a i t s o f Georg ia o f f t h e F rase r R i v e r plume.

D i sso l ved Oxvaen

Chi nook eggs r e q u i r e d i s s o l ved oxygen (DO) concen t ra t i ons o f 5.0 mg/l ( L e i t r i t z and Lewis 1980). Whitmore e t a l . (1960) descr ibed a marked avoidance o f oxygen concent ra t ions a t o r be- low 4.5 mg/l by j u v e n i l e chinook sa lnon i n t he summer a t 20.0°C (68.0°F). De- creased avoidance occur red i n t h e fa1 1 as temperatures d e c l i n e d o r as DO con- c e n t r a t i o n s rose above 4.5 mg/l , w i t h no avoidance no ted a t 6.0 mg/l. A l - though m i g r a t i n g a d u l t chinook salmon encountered DO l e v e l s o f 3.0 t o 4.0 ppm i n t h e Duwarni sh R i v e r Estuary , i t coul d n o t be demonstrated t h a t t h i s impeded t h e spawning m i g r a t i o n o f chinook s a l - mon ( F u j i o k a 1970). Katy e t a l . (1959) found t h a t chinook salmon c o u l d s u r v i v e when r e s t i n g w i t h DO l e v e l s as low as 2.0 mg/l and cou ld swim aga ins t an 0.8 f t / s c u r r e n t f o r a day when DO concen- t r a t i o n s were 3.0 mg/l . Subs t ra te

A d u l t chinook salmon spawn i n grav- e l rang ing f rom 6 cm (2.4 inches) t o 14 cm (5.5 inches) i n d iameter (B r i ggs 1953). Re iser and B jo rnn (1979) l i s t g rave l subs t ra tes f rom 1.3 cm (0.5 inches) t o 10.2 cm (4.0 inches) i n diameter as acceptable f o r spawning.

Spr i ng c h i nook j u v e n i 1 es t h a t overwi n- t e r i n f reshwate r r e q u i r e l a r g e bou l - de r h a b i t a t f o r w i n t e r r e fuge areas (Chapman and B j o r n n 1968). However, they p r e f e r d i f f e r e n t h a b i t a t s than do s t e e l head. I n t h e es tua r i es , j u v e n i l e chinook salmon show a wide range o f s u b s t r a t e assoc ia t i ons i n c l u d i n g mud, sand, g rave l , and e e l grass (Heal ey 1980). No s u b s t r a t e p re fe rence has been documented f o r a d u l t s i n t h e mari ne env i ronment.

Depth

Chinook salmon w i l l spawn i n r i v - e r s w i t h depths o f 0.10 m (0.3 f t ) t o 10 m (32.8 f t ) (Chapman 1943; B r i ggs 1953). The p r e f e r r e d depth f o r spawn- i n g i s >0.24 m (>0.79 f t ) f o r s p r i n g and f a l r ch inook -salmon and >0.30 m (>0.98 f t ) f o r summer c h i nook -(Rei se r a r d B jo rnn 1979). Juveni l e c h i nook salmon p re fe r deeper water (>0 .5 m o r b1.6 ft) than s tee lhead i n t he same streams, accord ing t o Chapman and B j ornn (1968). Juveni 1 e ch i nook salmon occupy the water near t h e su r f ace d u r i n g t h e i r i n i ti a1 mar ine stages and then u t i l i z e water down t o 60 m (197 f t ) , accord ing t o severa l au thors (Merkel 1957; Ba r rac l ough 1967; Robin- son e t a1 . 1968). Upstream m i g r a t i o n s a re g e n e r a l l y t r i g g e r e d by r a i ns, which r a i s e t h e r i v e r l e v e l s and change t h e wate r temperature.

Water Movement

Chinook salmon r e q u i r e enough cur - r e n t on t h e spawning beds t o v e n t i l a t e t h e eggs d u r i n g i ncuba t i on . J u v e n i l e chinook can d e t e c t and o r i e n t i n water v e l o c i t i e s o f 0.005 m/s (0.016 f t / s ) (Gregory 1962). A 70-mm (2.8- i nch) chinook can m a i n t a i n a home s t a t i o n f a c i n g v e l o c i t i e s o f 0.23 m/s (0.76 f t / s ) b u t l i e under a l a y e r o f 0.45 m/s (1.48 f t / s ) wa te r and be surround- ed by v e l o c i t i e s o f 0.6 m/s (1.97 f t / s ) (Chapman and B j o r n n 1968).

T u r b i d i t y

Accord ing t o Re ise r and B jo rnn (1979), salmonid f i s h e s w i l l cease movement o r m i g r a t i o n i n streams w i t h h i g h s i l t l oads (>4000 mg/ l ) . Study has shown t h a t exposure t o low l e v e l s o f v o l c a n i c ash i n a Y - t e s t chamber caused ch inook salmon t o e x h i b i t s i g - n i f i c a n t avoidance r e a c t i o n s (Whitman e t a l . 1982). Because t u r b i d water ab- sorbs more r a d i a t i o n than c l e a r water, a thermal b a r r i e r t o movement and m i g r a t i o n may a l s o develop (Re i se r and B j o r n n 1979).

Problems may r e s u l t i f t u r b i d i t y i s g r e a t enough t o cause t h e depos i - t i o n o f excess ive amounts o f sand and s i l t i n t h e g rave l , such as a f t e r a l a n d s l i d e . F r y emergence f rom t h e g rave l may be h i nde red by excess ive amounts o f sand and s i l t (Re ise r and B j o r n n 1979). Those c o n d i t i o n s a1 so may l i m i t p r o d u c t i o n o f b e n t h i c i n v e r - t e b r a t e s necessary f o r optimum r e a r i n g o f j u v e n i l e f i s h (Re ise r and B j o r n n 1979). Chinook salmon smo l ts may be q u i t e t o l e r a n t o f h i g h concen t ra t i ons o f v o l c a n i c ash and mudflow sediments acco rd i ng t o Ross (1982), who de te r - mined 96-hr LC va lues f o r these f i s h t o be 11,000 5 R g / ~ . Sub le tha l sediment concen t ra t i ons d i d n o t produce c o n s i s t e n t e f f e c t s on swimming per form- ance o r f a t i g u e v e l o c i t y . Chi nook smol t s were much l e s s t o l e r a n t o f sea- wa te r a f t e r exposure t o h i gh concent ra- t i o n s o f v o l c a n i c ash and mudflow sed i - ments, b u t low l e v e l exposure d i d n o t a f f e c t them. G i 11 t i s s u e s revea led o n l y minor e f f e c t s even a t t h e h i g h e s t exposure concen t ra t i ons , b u t death a t h i g h concen t ra t i ons o f these m a t e r i a1 s was caused by hypox ia (Ross 1982). Wal l e n (1951) observed t h a t behav io ra l r e a c t i o n s t o h i g h suspended s o l i d con- c e n t r a t i o n s were i d e n t i c a l t o respons- es t o l o w DO: t h e f i s h stayed near the su r face .

LITERATURE CITED

Ames, J. 1981. Competi ti on and preda- t i o n among Puget Sound salmon s t o c k s and some i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r enhancement programs. Wash. Dep. F ish . , h a r v e s t Flanage. D iv . , D r a f t . 5 1 PP.

Bar rac lough , W. E. 1967. Number, s i z e and food o f l a r v a l and j u v e n i l e f i s h caugh w i t h an I saacs -K idd t r a w l i n t h e s u r f a c e wa te rs o f t h e S t r a i t o f Georg ia . A p r i l 25-29, 1966. F i sh . Res. Board Can. Rep. Ser. No. 926. 79 pp.

Bennet t , D. H. 1979. P robab le w a l l e y e (z z o s t e d i on v i t reum) hah i t a t i o n i n txSnake R i v e r and tri b u t a r i e s o f Idaho. Idaho Water Resource Res. I n s t . , U n i v e r s i ty o f Idaho, Moscow. 44 pp.

Brannon, E. L . ( I n p r e s s ) . Proceed ings f r o m t h e symposiu~.n on t r o u t and salmon m i g r a t o r y b e h a v i o r . School o f F i s h e r i e s , Uni v e r s i ty o f >!ash- i n g t o n , S e a t t l e .

B r e t t , J. R. 1957. Temperature t o l e r - ance i n young P a c i f i c salmon genus Oncorh nchus. J. F i s h . Res. Board +5-323.

R r i g g s , J. C. 1953. The b e h a v i o r and r e p r o d u c t i o n o f salrnonid f i s h e s i n a sma l l c o a s t a l strearn. C a l i f . Dep. F i s h Game F i s h B u l l . No. 94. 62 pp.

Brown, L. R., and P. B. Moy le . 1981. The i m p a c t o f squawf i sh on sa lmon id p o p u l a t i o n s : a r e v i e w . N. h. J . F ish . Planage. l ( 1 ) :104-111.

Chapman, D. W., and T. C. B j o r n n . 1968. Di s t r i b u t i ons o f sa lmonids i n s t reams wi t h s p e c i a l r e f e r e n c e t o food and f e e d i n g . Pages 153-176 i n T. G. N o r t h c o t e , ed. Salmon a x t r o u t i n st reams. H. F?. FYlacPlillan L e c t u r e s i n F i s h e r i es, U n i v e r s i ty o f B r i ti sh Col umbi a, Vancouver.

Chaplnan, Id. M. 1940. The average w e i g h t o f food f i s h taker1 by t h e co~ : i~ne rc i a1 f i s h e r y i n t h e Col umbi a 8 i v e r . S i o l . Rev. Dep. F i s h . , S t a t e o f Idashington. 39A:31 pp .

Chapman, U. M. 1943. The spawning o f ch inook salmon i n t h e m a i n Columbia R i v e r . Copeia 1943(3 ) : 165-17n.

Cobb, J. 4. 1910. The k i n g salmon o f A laska. Trans. Am. F i s h . Soc. 39: 124-128.

Cramer, F. K., and D. F. Hammack. 1952. Salmon r e s e a r c h a t Deer Creek, Cal- i f o r n i a . 1J.S. F i s h W i l d l . Serv. Spec. S c i . Rep. F i sh . No. 57. 16 PP.

Davis, S. Y. 1981. D e t e r m i n a t i o n o f body composi ti on, cond i ti on, and m i g r a t i o n t i m i n g o f j u v e n i l e chum and c h i n o o k salmon i n 1 ower Skagi t p i v e r , Washington. 4 . . T h e s i s . Uni v e r s i ty o f Washi ngton, S e a t t l e . 97 PP.

1 , L. 1 . 1968. The subgrave l behav- i o r o f P a c i f i c salmon l a r v a e . Pages 89-100 i n T. G. Nor thco te , ed. Salmon a n d t r o u t i n s t reams. H. R. M a c M i l l a n L e c t u r e s i n F i sh - e r i es, Uni v e r s i t y o f B r i ti sh Col umbi a, Vancouver.

Dunford , W . D. 1975. Space and food u t i l i z a t i o n b y sa lmon ids i n marsh hab i t a t s o f F r a s e r Ri v e r Es- t u a r y . M.S. Thes is . U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia, Vancouver. 8 1 pp.

Fraser , C. M. 1920. F u r t h e r s t u d i e s on t h e g rowth r a t e i n P a c i f i c salmon. C o n t r i b. Can. B i 01. F i sh. 1918-20: 7-27.

F u j i o k a , J. F. 1970. P o s s i b l e e f f e c t s o f l o w d i s s o l v e d oxygen c o n t e n t i n t h e Duwamish R i v e r E s t u a r y on m i - g r a t i ng a d u l t c h i n o o k salmon. F1. S.

Thesi s. Uni v e r s i ty o f Washing ton, S e a t t l e . 77 pp.

n G h a r r e t t , J. F., and J. I. Hodges. 1950. Salmon f i s h e r i e s o f t h e coas ta l r i v e r s o f Oregon sou th o f t he Col urr~bia. Oreg. F i sh. Comm. Con t r i b . No. 13. 3 pp.

Gregory, R. W. 1962. Lower v e l o c i t y thresh01 ds f o r j u v e n i l e s i 1 v e r and ch inook salmon. M.S. Thesis. Uni- v e r s i ty o f Washi ngton, S e a t t l e . 59 PP .

Ha l lock , R. J., G. H. Warner, and D. H. Fry, J r . 1952. C a l i f o r n i a ' s p a r t i n a t h r e e - s t a t e salmon f i n g e r 1 i ng mark ing program. C a l i f . F i sh Came 38(3) : 301-332.

Har t , J. L. 1973. P a c i f i c f i s h e s o f Canada. F ish. Res. Board Can. Bui 1. 180. 740 pp.

Haw, F.3 and R. M. Buckley. 1973. Sa l twa te r f i sh i nq i n Washington. Stan Jones ~ u b i i s h i ng, ~ e a t t l e , Wash. 198 pp.

Healey, M. C. 1980. U t i l i z a t i o n o f Nanaimo R i ve r Estuar-y by j u v e n i l e - -

c h i nook salmon ( ~ n c o r h y n c h u s tsha- wvtscha). U.S. N a t l . Mar. F ish. Serv. F ish. B u l l . 77(3) :653-668.

Hodges, J. I., and J. F. Gha r re t t . 1949. T i 11 amook Bay s p r i n g c h i nook. Oreg . F i sh Comm. Res. B r i e f s 2 (2 ) : 11-16.

Junge, C. O., and W . H. B a y l i f f . 1955. Es t ima t i ng t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n o f a salmon p roduc t i on area by marked f i s h exper iments . Wash. Dep. F ish. F i sh. Res. Pap. 1(3):51-58.

Junge, C. O., and L. A. Phinney. 1963. Fac to rs i n f l u e n c i n g the r e t u r n o f f a l l ch inook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) t o Sp r i ng Creek hatch- e r y . U.S. F i sh W i l d l . Serv. Spec. Sc i . Rep. F ish. No. 445. 32 pp.

Katy, M., A. P r i t chard , and C. E. Warren. 1959. The ah i 1 i t y o f some salmonids and a c e n t r a r c h i d t o swim i n water o f reduced oxygen con ten t . Trans. Am. F ish . Soc. 38(2):88-95.

L e i t r i t z , E., and R. C. Lewis. 1980. T rou t and salmon c u l t u r e . C a l i f . Dep. F i sh Game F i s h B u l l . No. 164. 197 pp.

L ipovsky, S. J. 1977. Food h a b i t s o f j u v e n i l e salmon i n t he Columbia R ive r . Pages 14-21 i n J u v e n i l e salmonids i n the es tua ry , a work- shop. Am. I n s t . F ish . Res. B i o l . , Oregon-S.W. Wash. M s t . 38 pp.

Fa ins , E. M., and J . M. Smith. 1964. The d i s t r i hu t i on , s i ze , t ime, and c u r r e n t p re fe rences o f seaward m ig ran t ch inook salmon i n t h e Col umbi a and Snake R i ve rs . Wash. Dep. Fish. F ish. Res. Pap. 2 (3 ) : 5-43.

Mattson, C. 1948. Spawning ground s t u d i e s of W i l l ame t t e R i ve r s p r i n g ch inook salmon. Oreg. F i sh Comm. Res. B r i e f s l ( 2 ) : 21-32.

McKee, F. B. 1950, Study of t h e wa te r supply a t the New Mar ion Forks ha tchery on t he Nor th Santiam R iver . Oreg. F i sh Comm. Res. B r i e f s 3(1):22-32.

Plerkel, T. J. 1957. Food h a b i t s o f t he k i n g salmon (0 . tshawytscha) i n t he - - v i c i n i t y o f San Franc isco, C a l i - f o r n i a . C a l i f . F i s h Game 43 ( 4 ) : 249-270.

Meyer, J . H., T. A. P ie rce , and S. B. Pathan. 1980. Di s t r i b u t i on and food habi t s o f j u v e n i l e salmonids i n t h e Duwamisk Estuary, Washing- ton. FA@ Rep. U.S. F i s h W i l d l . Serv., Olympia. 4 1 pp.

f l i 1 l e r , 9. 1 , J . A. We the ra l l , S. ZP- bold, W. H. Lenary, G. D. S t a u f f e r , J. Fu j i oka , P I . Halstead, E. 0. Salo, and T. S. Eng l i sh . 1957. E s t ! ~ a r i ne eco logy s tud ies . Pages 24-31 i n 1966 Research i n f i s h e r - i e s . Annu. Rep., C o n t r i b . No. 280, School o f F i s h e r i es, Uni v e r s i ty o f Washi ng ton, S e a t t l e.

V i l ne , D. J. 1957. Recent B r i t i s h Columbia s p r i n g and coho salmon tagging exper iments , and a compari- son \wi th those conducted i n 1926

and 1927 o f f t he coas t of Var~couver Parker, R. R., and P. A. La r k i n . 1959. I s l a n d . B u l l . F i sh . Res. Board A concept o f growth i n f i shes . J. Can. No. 113. 56 pp. F i sh. Res. Board Can. 16(5):721-745.

Miyamoto, J., T. Deming, and D. Thayer. 1980. Es tua r i ne r es i dency and h a b i t a t u t i l i z a t i o n b y j u v e n i l e anadromous salmoni ds wi t h i n Com- mencement Bay, Tacoma, Washington. Puya l lup T r i b a l Fish. D iv . , F ish . Manage. Div., Tech. Rep. No. 80-1 ( D r a f t ) .

M o t t l e y , C. M. C. 1929. P a c i f i c salmon m i g r a t i o n : r e p o r t on the s tudy o f t h e sca les o f s p r i n g salmon (0. tshawytscha) tagged i n 1926 aKd 1927 o f f t he west coas t o f Van- couver I s l and . Con t r i b. Can. Bi 01. Fish. , N.S. 4(30):473-493.

Na t i onal Marine F i s h e r i es Serv ice . 1977. F i s h e r i e s o f t h e U r ~ i t e d States. Cur ren t f i shery s t a t i s- t i c s . No. 7200. U.S. Govt. P r i n t . O f f i c e . 96 pp.

Na t i ona l Mar ine F i s h e r i e s Serv ice . 1981. F i s h e r i e s o f t h e Un i t ed S ta tes . Cur ren t f i shery s t a t i s- t i c s . No. 8100. U.S. Govt. P r i n t . O f f i c e . 132 pp.

Newton, J. ll. 1972. The Washington S t a t e salmon f i she r i es : a simul a- ti on s tudy. Ph. D. Di s s e r t a t i on. Uni v e r s i ty o f Washington, S e a t t l e . 201 pp.

O'Connor, R. J. 1977. Ocean growth, mo r ta l i ty and ma t u r i ty o f Col umbi a R i ve r f a l l salmon. M.S. Thes is . l l n i v e r s i ty o f Washi ngton, S e a t t l e . 71 PP.

Olsen, P. A., and R. F. Fos te r . 1955. Temperature t o l e r a n c e o f eggs and young of Columbia R i ve r ch inook salmon. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 85: 203-207.

Parker , R. R., and W. K i rkness . 1956. King salmon and t h e ocean t r o l l fi shery o f sou theas te rn A1 aska. Alaska Dep. Fish. Res. Rep. No. 1. 64 PP.

Parks, W . W. 1975. A P a c i f i c salmon f i s h e r i e s model f o r t h e s tudy o f gear r e g u l a t i o n : an a p p l i c a t i o n t o t h e Washington t r o l l f i shery. Ph . D. Di s s e r t a t i on. Uni v e r s i ty of Washington, S e a t t l e . 159 pp.

Pauley, G. B. 1982. E f f e c t s o f rec rea- t i o n a l f i s h i n g on anadromous s a l - monids. Wash. Coop. F ish. Res. I l n i t, IJn ivers i ty o f Washington, S e a t t l e . Tech. Rep. No. 7-82. -35 pp.

P r i tchard, A. L. 1940. S tud ies on t he age o f t h e coho salmon (Oncorhyn- chus k i s u t c h ) and the s p r i n g salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) i n B r i t- i sh Col umbia. Trans. R. Soc. Can. , Ser. 3, Sect. 5, 34:99-120.

Reimers, P. E. 1968. Social behav io r among j uven i 1 e fa1 1 c h i nook salmon. J. F ish. Res. Board Can. 25(9 ) : . . 2005-2008.

Reiser , D. W., and T. J. B jo rnn . 1979. H a h i t a t requ i rements o f anadromous salmonids. Pages 1-54 i n W . R. Meehan, ed. I n f l u e n c e of f o r e s t and rangeland management on anadromous f i s h h a b i t a t i n the Western Un i ted S ta tes and Canada. U.S. For. Serv. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-96.

Rich, W. H. 1920. E a r l y l i f e h i s t o r y and seaward m i g r a t i o n o f ch inook salmon i n the Columbia and Sacra- mento Rivers . B u l l . U.S. Bur. F ish . Vol . 37. 74 pp.

Robinson, D. G., W. E. Barraclough, and J. D. Ful ton . 1968. Number, s i z e composi t ion, we igh t and food of l a r v a l and j u v e n i l e f i s h caught w i t h a two-boat su r f ace t r a w l i n t he S t r a i t of Georgia, Flay 1-4, 1967. Fish. Res. Board Can. Rep. Ser. No. 964. 105 pp.

Rogers, D. E., and K. W. I l yers . 1981a. O r i g i n s o f ch inook salmon i n the

Japanese mothersh i p salmon f i shery . Page 11 i n 1980 Research i n f i s h e r - i e s . An=. Rep. Con t r ib . No. 575, School o f F i she r i es , U n i v e r s i t y o f Washington, S e a t t l e .

Rogers, D. E., and K. W. Myers. 1981b. O r i g i ns o f ch inook salmon i n f o r - e i g n t r aw l s. Page 11 i n 1980 Research i n f i s h e r i e s . ~ n x . Rep. Con t r ib . No. 575, School o f F ish- e r i es , Un i ve r s i ty o f Washington, S e a t t l e.

Ross, B. D. 1982. E f f ec t s o f suspended v o l c a n i c sediment on coho (0. - k i s u t c h ) and f a l l ch inook (0 . - tshawytscha) salmon smol t s i n a r t i - f i c i a1 streams. M.S. Thes is . U n i v e r s i t y o f Washington, S e a t t l e . 128 pp.

Rounsefe l l , G. A. 1957. Fecund i t y o f Nor th American Salmonidae. 1J.S. F i s h and W i l d l . Serv. F ish. B u l l . 57(122) :451-468.

Salo, E. 0. 1969. Es tua r i ne eco logy research p r o j e c t . F i na l Rep. School o f F i s h e r i es, Un i ve r s i ty o f Washington, Sea t t l e . 80 pp.

Seymour, A. H. 1956. E f f e c t s o f tem- p e r a t u r e upon young c h i nook salmon. Ph .D. Di s s e r t a t i o n . U n i v e r s i t y o f Washington, S e a t t l e . 127 pp.

Shepard, M. F. 1981. S ta tus and rev iew o f t he knowledge p e r t a i n i n g t o t he e s t u a r i n e habi t a t r e q u i remen t s and l i f e h i s t o r y o f chum and ch inook salmon j u v e n i l e s i n Puget Sound. F i n a l Rep. Wash. Coop. F ish. Res. Un i t , U n i v e r s i t y o f Washington, Sea t t l e . 113 pp.

S ibe r t , J. 1975. Residence o f j u v e n i l e salmonids -in t h e Nanaimo R i ve r Estuary. F ish. Mar. Ser. Res. Dev. Tech. Rep. No. 537. 23 pp.

Sims, C. W. 1970. J u v e n i l e salmon and s t e e l head i n t h e Columbia R i v e r Estuary. Pages 80-86 i n Proceed- i n g s o f Northwest E s E r i n e and Coastal Zone Symposium. Bureau o f Spor t F i s h e r i e s and W i 1 d l i fe, Por t1 and, Oregon.

Snyder, J. 0. 1923. A second r e p o r t on t h e r e t u r n o f k i n g salmon marked i n 1919, i n t h e Klamath R ive r . C a l i f . F i s h Game 9 : l -9 .

Stober, Q. J., S. J. Walden, and D. T. Gr iggs. 1973. J u v e n i l e salmon m i g r a t i o n th rough Skagi t Bay. Pages 35-70 i n Q. J. Stober and E. 0. Salo, e d r Eco log i ca l s t u d i e s o f t h e proposed K i k e t I s l a n d nu- c l e a r power s i t e . F i n a l Rep. FRI-UW-7304, U n i v e r s i ty o f Washi ngton, S e a t t l e .

Ty l e r , R. W. 1963. D i s t r i b u t i o n and m i g r a t i o n o f young salmon i n Ever- e t t Harbor, 1982. F i n a l Rep. E v e r e t t Bay Stud ies. F ish. Res. I n s t . , Uni v e r s i ty o f Washi ngton , S e a t t l e . 26 pp.

Van Hyning, J . M. 1973. Fac to rs a f - f e c t i n g t h e abundance of fa1 1 ch inook sa l~ i ion i n t he Columbia R ive r . Oreg. Fish. Comm. Res. Rep. 4: 1-87.

Wallen, I. E. 1951. The d i r e c t e f f e c t o f t u r b i d i t y on f i s h e s . Ph.D. Dis- s e r t a t i o n . Uni v e r s i ty o f Michigan, Ann Arbor. 57 pp.

Washi ngton S t a t e Department o f F i sher- i e s . 1959. F i s h e r i e s : Volume 2. C o n t r i b u t i o n s o f Western States, Alaska, and B r i ti sh Columbia t o salmon f i s h e r i e s o f t h e N o r t h Aner- i c a n P a c i f i c Ocean. 83 pp.

Whitman, R. P., T. P. Quinn, and E. I-. Brannon. 1982. I n f l u e n c e o f suspended v o l c a n i c ash on homing hehav io r o f a d u l t ch inook salmon. Trans. An. F ish . Soc. 111(1):63-69.

Whi tmore, C. M., C. E. Warren, and P. Doudorof f . 1960. Avoidance reac- t i o n s o f salmonid and c e n t r a r c h i d f i shes t o low oxygen concent ra- t i o n s . Trans. Am. F ish . Soc. 89(1 ) : 17-26.

Wr ight , S. 1981. Contemporary P a c i f i c salmon f i s h e r i e s management. N. An. 3. F ish . Manage. 1(2):29-40.

FWS/OBS-82/11.6* i Species P r o f i l e s : L i f e H i s t o r i e s and Environmental o f Coasta l F ishes and I n v e r t e b r a t e s ( P a c i f i c Nor thwest ) -- Chinook 1,

50272 -101

F. Shepard, G i l b e r t B. Pauley

Washington Cooperat ive F i s h e r y Research U n i t School - o f F i s h e r i es U n i v e r s i t y o f Washington S e a t t l e , WA 98195

3. Recipient's Accession NO. I REPORT DOCUMENTATlON ]'.-REPORT NO. 2.

16. Abstract (Limit: 200 words)

Species p r o f i l e s a r e l i t e r a t u r e summaries o f t h e taxonomy, morphology, range, l i f e h i s t o r y , and env i ronmenta l requ i rements o f c o a s t a l a q u a t i c spec ies . They a r e prepared t o a s s i s t i n env i ronmenta l impact assessment. The ch inook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), wh ich make up 9% t o 13% o f t h e commercial salmon ca tch , a r e t h e most h i g h l y p r i z e d and rep resen t t h e most d o l l a r va lue o f t h e P a c i f i c salmon. They a r e a1 so a h i g h l y p r i z e d s p o r t f i s h , reach ing we igh ts o f 8.2 t o 9.1 k g (18 t o 20 l b ) o r more d u r i n g t h e i r f o u r t h yea r . They a r e anadromous f i s h t h a t spend 1 y e a r t o 18 months i n f r e s h w a t e r and then m i g r a t e t o s a l t w a t e r . They remain i n t h e marine environment 1 t o 6 yea rs , averag ing 3 t o 4 y e a r s b e f o r e r e t u r n i n g t o t h e i r r i v e r o f o r i g i n t o spawn. Three major races o f ch inook salmon e x i s t ( s p r i n g , summer, f a l l ) and have d i f f e r e n t spawning c y c l e s . A l l ch inook salmon d i e a f t e r t hey spawn.

12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address

N a t i o n a l Coasta l Ecosystems Team U.S. Army Corps o f Engineers F i s h and W i l d l i f e Se rv i ce Waterways Exper iment S t a t i o n U.S. Department o f t h e I n t e r i o r P.O. Box 631 Washington, DC 20240 V icksburg, MS 39180

E s t u a r i e s M i g r a t i o n Anadromous

13. Type of Report & Period Covered

14.

( b. Identlfian/Open.Ended Terms I

15. Supplementary Notes

*U.S. Army Corps o f Engineers r e p o r t No. TR EL-82-4.

L ! U n c l a s s i f i e d (See ANSI-239.18) OPTIONAL FORM 272 (4-77)

(Formerly NTIS-35) Department of Commerce

Sal i n i ty requ i rements L i f e h i s t o r y Temperature requ i rements Spawning Chinook salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha

C. COSATI FieldlGroup

18. Avallabllity Statement

Unl i m i t e d

19. Security Class (This Report) 21. No. of Pages

U n c l a s s i f i e d 20. Security Class (This Page) 22. Price

REGION 1 Regional Director U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Lloyd Five Hundred Building, Suite 1692 500 N.E. Multnornah Street Portland, Oregon 97232

REGION 4 Regional Director U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Richard B. Russell Building 75 Spring Street, S.W. Atlanta, Georgia 30303

REGION 2 REGION 3 Regional Director Regional Director U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service P.O. Box 1306 Federal Building, Fort Snelling Albuquerque, New Mexico 87 103 Twin Cities, Minnesota 55 1 11

REGION 5 REGION 6 Regional Director Regional Director U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service One Gateway Center P.O. Box 25486 Newton Corner, Massachusetts 02 158 Denver Federal Center

Denver, Colorado 80225

REGION 7 Regional Director U.S. Fish and Wildlire Service 101 1 E. Tudor Road Anchorage, Alaska 99503

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR U.S. FlSH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE

As the Nation's principal conservation agency, the Department of the Interior has responsibility for most of our.nationally owned public lands and natural resources. This includes fostering the wisest use of our land and water resources, protecting our fish and wildlife, preserving theenvironmental and cultural values of our national parks and historical places, and providing for the enjoyment of life through outdoor recreation. The Department as- sesses our energy and mineral resources and works to assure that their development is in the best interests of all our people. The Department also has a major responsibility for American Indian reservation communities and for people who live in island territories under U.S. administration.

~nvironmental requirements of coastal fishes and ... tr el-82-4 october 1983 species prof i 1 es :...

Documents