Fraser River sockeye salmon: data synthesis and cumulative impacts
Fraser River sockeye salmon: data synthesis and cumulative impacts Fraser River sockeye salmon: data synthesis and cumulative impacts
sockeye stocks tended to coincide with periods of high productivity in western Alaskanstocks, and vice versa.The Cohen Commission is interested in factors affecting the Fraser sockeye fishery, not onlyFraser sockeye productivity. Over the last two decades there has been an increasing amount ofen-route mortality of returning Fraser sockeye spawners (i.e., mortality between the Missionenumeration site and the spawning ground), as illustrated for late run sockeye in Figure 4.1-5.This results in reduced harvest, as fishery managers do their best to ensure enough spawnersreturn to the spawning ground in spite of considerable mortality along the way. Since en-routemortality is already included in estimates of recruits, it does not affect estimates of productivity,but it does affect the fishery.Other patterns noted by McKinnell et al. (2011) have particular relevance to the low 2009 returns(2007 ocean entry for most sockeye), and provide some interesting contrasts among stocks withdifferent life history patterns and migratory pathways:o most Fraser River sockeye stocks had very poor returns/spawner in 2009, but;o Columbia River sockeye had double their average returns in 2009 (recruits/spawner notavailable),o hatchery-reared sockeye from Cultus Lake showed typical survival rates through theStrait of Georgia in 2007 (estimated from tracking acoustic tags), ando there were record high returns of Harrison River sockeye in 2010, from underyearlingsthat reared in the Strait of Georgia in 2007.32
Figure 4.1-3. Estimates of long term trends in total life cycle productivity for the four Fraser sockeye run timinggroups, by brood year. The graph is based on productivity estimates for each stock, using a smoothedKalman filter, using the stock-recruitment model that best fit the data (methods explained in Peterman andDorner 2011). Brood year is year of spawning. The productivity estimates are in the same units for allstocks, plotted relative to each stock’s mean and standard deviation. Four stocks show no trend in thissmoothed Kalman filter indicator (i.e., Raft, Scotch, Portage, Weaver). This may be due to the absence ofany long term trend, a masking of the underlying trend by high year to year variability, and/or gaps in thetime series. Annual residuals in productivity for these four stocks have however been well below their longterm means in several brood years since 2000. Source: Peterman and Dorner (2011)33
- Page 1: April 2011technical report 6Fraser
- Page 7 and 8: Stage 2: Smolt OutmigrationWe analy
- Page 9 and 10: of multiple stressors and factors,
- Page 11 and 12: 4.3.5 Other evidence ..............
- Page 13 and 14: List of TablesTable 4.2-1. Evaluati
- Page 16 and 17: List of FiguresFigure 2.3-1. Cumula
- Page 18 and 19: these integrative frameworks, conve
- Page 21 and 22: 2.0 Cumulative Impacts or Effects2.
- Page 23 and 24: assumed that there is no potential
- Page 25 and 26: classes of stressors. However, if s
- Page 27: affected by many stressors over its
- Page 30 and 31: examples illustrate this problem --
- Page 32 and 33: possibly even negligible component
- Page 34 and 35: Figure 3.3-1. The conceptual model
- Page 36 and 37: 3.3.3 Life history perspective/appr
- Page 38 and 39: additional analyses to gain further
- Page 40 and 41: Figure 3.3-3. Flow diagram used to
- Page 42 and 43: This project is unusual in its scop
- Page 45 and 46: 4.0 Results, Synthesis and Discussi
- Page 47: Peterman and Dorner (2011) have thr
- Page 51 and 52: Figure 4.1-5. A) Total run size of
- Page 53 and 54: Figure 4.1-6. Aggregate returns to
- Page 55 and 56: o were generally worse during the l
- Page 57 and 58: Freshwater predators on juvenile so
- Page 59 and 60: copper, iron, mercury and silver).
- Page 61 and 62: Several analyses by MacDonald et al
- Page 63 and 64: abundances (Sproat, Klukshu, Chilka
- Page 65 and 66: feel reasonably confident in this c
- Page 67 and 68: Nelitz et al. (2011; Table 18) foun
- Page 69 and 70: in the Lower Fraser than other Fras
- Page 71 and 72: stressors. Thus our conclusions hav
- Page 73 and 74: There are many marine predators tha
- Page 75 and 76: assumption that exposure occurs whe
- Page 77 and 78: observations that are then averaged
- Page 79 and 80: Johannes et al. (2011) demonstrate
- Page 81 and 82: “likely” contributor to the ove
- Page 83 and 84: Table 4.4-2. Model specifications f
- Page 85 and 86: Region Variable M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 M
- Page 87 and 88: 3. survival rates within key portio
- Page 89 and 90: 2011). The thermal limit hypothesis
- Page 91 and 92: Historically, the majority of retur
- Page 93 and 94: salinity. There is much evidence th
- Page 95 and 96: declines (discussed in section 4.2
- Page 97 and 98: There is indisputable evidence of t
<strong>sockeye</strong> stocks tended to coincide with periods of high productivity in western Alaskanstocks, <strong>and</strong> vice versa.The Cohen Commission is interested in factors affecting the <strong>Fraser</strong> <strong>sockeye</strong> fishery, not only<strong>Fraser</strong> <strong>sockeye</strong> productivity. Over the last two decades there has been an increasing amount ofen-route mortality of returning <strong>Fraser</strong> <strong>sockeye</strong> spawners (i.e., mortality between the Missionenumeration site <strong>and</strong> the spawning ground), as illustrated for late run <strong>sockeye</strong> in Figure 4.1-5.This results in reduced harvest, as fishery managers do their best to ensure enough spawnersreturn to the spawning ground in spite of considerable mortality along the way. Since en-routemortality is already included in estimates of recruits, it does not affect estimates of productivity,but it does affect the fishery.Other patterns noted by McKinnell et al. (2011) have particular relevance to the low 2009 returns(2007 ocean entry for most <strong>sockeye</strong>), <strong>and</strong> provide some interesting contrasts among stocks withdifferent life history patterns <strong>and</strong> migratory pathways:o most <strong>Fraser</strong> <strong>River</strong> <strong>sockeye</strong> stocks had very poor returns/spawner in 2009, but;o Columbia <strong>River</strong> <strong>sockeye</strong> had double their average returns in 2009 (recruits/spawner notavailable),o hatchery-reared <strong>sockeye</strong> from Cultus Lake showed typical survival rates through theStrait of Georgia in 2007 (estimated from tracking acoustic tags), <strong>and</strong>o there were record high returns of Harrison <strong>River</strong> <strong>sockeye</strong> in 2010, from underyearlingsthat reared in the Strait of Georgia in 2007.32