Closing the Loop: Modeling the coho salmon life cycle in the context of habitat,

climate, and management

Pete Lawson, Libby Logerwell, Nate Mantua, Bob Francis, and Vera Agostini

OCN Coho

Queets River

Air Temperature Data

Streamflow Data

OCNOregon Coastal NaturalCoho salmon

•Aggregate of 13 basins•Rain-fed streams•Threatened status (on and off)

The OCN Problem:OCN Recruits (t+1) and Spawners (t-2)

0.0

100.0

200.0

300.0

400.0

500.0

600.0

19

69

19

70

19

71

19

72

19

73

19

74

19

75

19

76

19

77

19

78

19

79

19

80

19

81

19

82

19

83

19

84

19

85

19

86

19

87

19

88

19

89

19

90

19

91

19

92

19

93

19

94

19

95

19

96

19

97

19

98

19

99

Smolt Year

Co

ho

Salm

on

(x 1

000)

OCN Spawners (t-2)

OCN Recruits (t+1)

OCN Recruits (t+1) and OPIH survival (t)

0.0

100.0

200.0

300.0

400.0

500.0

600.0

1968 1973 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998

Smolt Year

Recru

its (

x 1

000)

0.0000

0.0200

0.0400

0.0600

0.0800

0.1000

0.1200

0.1400

Mari

ne S

urv

ival

OCN Recruits (t+1)

OPIH Marine Survival (t)

OCN smolts and smolts/spawner reconstructed from OPIH- and GAM-estimated marine survivals. 1992 estimate omitted from analysis.

0.0

1000.0

2000.0

3000.0

4000.0

5000.0

6000.0

7000.0

8000.01

96

9

19

70

19

71

19

72

19

73

19

74

19

75

19

76

19

77

19

78

19

79

19

80

19

81

19

82

19

83

19

84

19

85

19

86

19

87

19

88

19

89

19

90

19

91

19

92

19

93

19

94

19

95

19

96

19

97

19

98

19

99

Smolt Year

Sm

olt

s (

x 1

000)

0.0

50.0

100.0

150.0

200.0

250.0

300.0

350.0

400.0

450.0

500.0

Sm

olt

s p

er

Sp

aw

ner

Adjusted Smolts

Adjusted Smolts per Spawner

1992

Environmental data sets -- freshwater

• 1969-1999 smolt year

• Stream Flow– From 6 USGS gauging stations

• Monthly mean flow

• Standardized at each station, then averaged

• Air Temperature– From 3 WRCC locations

• Annual mean air temperature

• Standardized at each station, then averaged

AnnTemp

parti

al fo

r Ann

Tem

p

-1 0 1 2

-300

0-1

000

010

00

Trans

parti

al fo

r Tra

ns

280 300 320 340

-200

00

1000

P4

bs(P

4, k

nots

= 0

, deg

ree

= 1)

-2 -1 0 1 2

-300

0-1

000

010

00

P5

parti

al fo

r P5

-1 0 1 2

-200

00

1000

Partial plots for OCN smolts

Winter Flow (t1) Spring Flow (t1)

Fall TransitionvFall TransitionAnnual Temperature

Year

Ad

j Sm

olts

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

10

00

20

00

30

00

40

00

50

00

60

00

70

00

ObservedPredicted

Observed and fitted OCN smolts

Year

Sm

olts

So why should we believe this?

•One basin•Glacier-fed•1981-2000 smolt years•Smolts and spawners measured directly•No dams•Flow data from USGS -- one station•Air temperature data from WRCC -- one station

Because I repeated the analysis with a completely independent data set

from the Queets River, Washington.

AnnTemp

part

ial f

or A

nnTe

mp

-1 0 1 2

-1.5

*10^

50

10^5

P4

bs(P

4, k

nots

= 0

, deg

ree

= 1

)

-1 0 1 2

-2*1

0^5

-10^

50

10^5

Year

Sm

olts

1985 1990 1995 2000

10

00

00

15

00

00

20

00

00

25

00

00

30

00

00

35

00

00

40

00

00

ObservedPredicted

Annual Temperature Winter Flow (t1)

Sm

olts

Year

Results for Queets Smolts

The bottom line:Marine and freshwater environmental variables are correlated so that good (poor) marine survival is associated with good (poor) freshwater production.

Year SST.JFM.t0 Trans UW.AMJ SST.JFM.t1

SST.JFM.t0 0.466 1

Trans 0.246 0.225 1

UW.AMJ -0.239 -0.196 -0.462 1

SST.JFM.t1 0.439 0.134 0.261 -0.140 1

Fall Trans 0.058 -0.019 -0.235 0.011 0.124

P4 -0.054 -0.125 0.352 0.175 -0.054

P5 0.156 0.047 0.468 -0.399 0.082

Ann Temp 0.676 0.375 0.424 -0.461 0.359

Mar

ine

Fre

shw

ater

OO++

Spawners

Early Late

fecundity

Eggs

*

*

OO++

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0% 25% 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200%

Percent of Full Seeding (P)

Egg-

to-P

arr S

urvi

val R

ate

Sparr = 0.064P-0.743

R2 = 0.68

4 Fish per Mile

12% of Full Seeding

19% of Full Seeding

50% of Full Seeding

75% of full Seeding

899 21,700 3,596 NA 4,123 10,850 16,275

1,163 55,000 4,652 NA 10,450 27,500 41,250

1,685 50,000 6,740 NA 9,500 25,000 37,500

450 5,400 NA 86 1,026 2,700 4,050

4,197 132,100 25,099 66,050 99,075

(based on return of jacks per hatchery smolt)

HighMediumLowExtremely Low(>0.0040 jacks/smolt)(0.0015 to 0.0039)

M R

Marine Survival Index

Parent Spawner

Status 1/

0 - 8% 0 - 8% 0 - 8% 0 - 8%

< 15%

< 15%

< 15%

< 11%

15,074Coastwide Total

(<0.0008 jacks/smolt) (0.0008 to 0.0014 )

Sub-aggregate and Basin Specific Spawner Criteria Data

Northern

North - Central

South - Central

Southern

< 8%

< 8%

< 11%

< 15% < 25%

L

< 11%

Q

J

I

H

G

O

< 30%

N

< 20%

T

< 45%

S

< 38%

Sub-aggregate

HighParent Spawners > 75% of full seeding

Miles of Available Spawning Habitat

E

D

C

B

< 8%

< 8%

100% of Full

Seeding

"Critical" Very Low, Low, Medium & High

A K P

Parent Spawners > 4 fish per mile & < 19% of full seeding

Critical 2/

Parental Spawners < 4 fish per mile

MediumParent Spawners > 50% & < 75% of full seeding

LowParent Spawners > 19% & < 50% of full seeding

Very Low

F

Year

1900 1950 2000 2050 2100

Sta

nd

ard

ize

d A

no

ma

ly

-4

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

4

5

1950 2000

OC

N C

oho Index

0

1500

Observed PDO Projected PNA

PopulationDynamics

FreshwaterHabitat

Climate Patterns

Marine Survival

HarvestManagement

MetapopulationDynamics

33 Generation Time Series of Spawning Escapements with

Zero Harvest and Two Harvest StrategiesT

ho

us

an

ds

of

Sp

aw

ne

rs

0

200

400

600

800

0

200

400

600

800

1000

Generation

0 10 20 300

200

400

600

800

Base

Exploitation Rate

Escapement Goal = 200 thousand

<= 35%

Probability of Extinction in 100 Years

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4

BasinNehalem

Tillamook

Nestucca

North Tribs

Siletz

Yaquina

Alsea

Siuslaw

Mid Tribs

Umpqua

Coos

Coquille

Rogue

Base Exp. Rate Esc. Goal

Local Extinction Probabilities withZero Harvest and Two Harvest Policies

DON’T PANIC!The model is definitive, reality may vary.

Nine Questions to Validate Models

1. Is the structure adequate to serve the purposes for which it will be used?

2. What characteristics of the simulated system have been left out or simplified?

3. What might the effects be?

4. How do model structure and behavior compare to similar models?

5. How are uncertainty and error incorporated into the analysis, and how do the results depend on uncertainties and assumptions?

Nine Questions to Validate Models (cont'd)

6. Are the parameter definitions and ranges justifiable?

7. Does the model produce expected behaviors for ordinary, as well as extraordinary cases-i.e., have the authors defined the range over which the model is valid, and the circumstances under which the model is questionable or invalid?

8. Does the model respond appropriately and usefully to simulated policies?

9. How does the analysis relate to the problem as it is defined, and the conclusions drawn?

c: Population Size

b: Ocean Environment

a: Freshwater Habitat Quality

=

+

DCB

A

Time

Esca

pe

men

t

0

Lawson 1993

Year

1900 1950 2000 2050 2100

Sta

nd

ard

ize

d A

no

mal

y

-4

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

4

5

1950 2000

OC

N C

oho

Inde

x

0

1500

Observed PDO Projected PNA

PDO Projected by Hadley Centre Model

Peter LawsonNMFS/NWFSC2030 SE Marine Science DriveNewport, OR 97365541-867-0430peter.w.lawson@noaa.gov