From: "Saved by Windows Internet Explorer 7" Subject: Contents Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2010 22:27:21 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="text/html"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0000_01CA9AE8.E5F8F9F0" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.0.6001.18049 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0000_01CA9AE8.E5F8F9F0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Location: http://www.water.ca.gov/iep/newsletters/1999/1999_contents-winter.htm
Interagency = Ecological=20 Program Fourth Quarter Highlights, October - December, 1998 2
Shallow Water = Habitat=20 Workshop Summary 10
A = CALFED-supported Study of=20 the Delta's Foodweb Base 19
Sources of = Organic Matter=20 in the Delta as Inferred through the Use of Biomarkers 20
Another = Problem Mussel=20 Headed Our Way? 21
Water Year = 1998 DAYFLOW=20 Data Availability 22
Density =
Dependent Growth=20
and Diet Changes in Young-of-the-year Striped Bass (Morone saxatilis) in =
the
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta 22
Peer-reviewed = Papers=20 Accepted or Published in 1998 24
The Second =
Annual IEP=20
Monitoring Survey of the Chinese Mitten Crab in the Sacramento-San=20
Joaquin
Delta and Suisun Marsh 24
Perry = Herrgesell--Moving on=20 to Bigger Things 27
The = Interagency Ecological=20 Program--Recent Changes and a New 1999 Program 27
1999 Switzer = Environmental=20 Leadership Grants--Call for Proposals 29
Sediment = Inflow to the=20 Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and the San Francisco Bay 30
Health =
Assessment of Merced=20
River Fish Facility and Feather River Hatchery Juvenile =
Fall-run
Chinook=20
Salmon Released at Mossdale and CWT Fish Recovered at Chipps Island - =
1998=20
34
1998 = Monitoring of the=20 Endangered Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse in Suisun Marsh 36
The Third = Delta Smelt=20 Workshop 40
What is the = Impact of the=20 Introduced Brazilian Waterweed Egeria densa to the Delta Ecosystem? = 43
Comparative =
Swimming=20
Performance of Native (Delta Smelt and Splittail) and =
Introduced
(Inland=20
Silverside and Wakasagi) Delta Fish 45
Results of = 1998=20 Complementary VAMP Salmon Smolt Survival Evaluation 49
Prospect = Island Fish=20 Sampling Results--Some Thoughts on Shallow Water Habitat Restoration = 56
Delta = Inflow/Outflow and=20 Pumping 59
David Kohlhorst, = Department of Fish and=20 Game
We completed tagging = legal-sized=20 (117 to 183 cm) sturgeon captured in a trammel net in San Pablo Bay on = 30=20 October 1998. We last tagged sturgeon in 1997 when 984 white sturgeon = and eight=20 green sturgeon were tagged in 37 days of fishing (26.6 white sturgeon = tagged per=20 day). This year, in 34 days of fishing, we tagged 1,233 white sturgeon = (36.3=20 fish tagged per day), but no green sturgeon. Three legal-sized green = sturgeon=20 were caught and were taken alive to the University of California, Davis, = in=20 cooperation with researchers there. White sturgeon population size in = 1998,=20 based on a multiple-census, mark-recapture technique, was estimated to = be over=20 100,000 legal-sized fish, but this estimate is probably biased by the = small=20 number of recaptures (4), the lack of random mixing of the tagged fish = into the=20 untagged population, and different catchability between untagged and=20 recently-tagged fish. A Petersen mark-recapture estimate for 1997, based = on nine=20 tag recaptures during 1998 tagging, is 108,000 legal-sized fish. White = sturgeon=20 abundance estimates for the early 1990s were all less than 50,000 fish = (and=20 catch rates ranged from 6.1 to 16.2 fish per day) and suggest a = substantial=20 increase in sturgeon abundance in the estuary during the last five = years. In=20 both 1997 and 1998, application of an age-length key to the length data = suggests=20 that the 1982 and 1983 (and possibly the 1986), year classes are strong=20 contributors to the population. Thus, the recent increase in abundance = of white=20 sturgeon in the estuary may be due to these strong year classes and = return of=20 fish from the ocean after the end of the persistent drought of the late = 1980s=20 and early 1990s.
Catches of other = species in the=20 trammel net were generally much lower in 1998 than in 1997; overall = catch of=20 other fish species decreased from 1,621 in 1997 to 360 in 1998. = Elasmobranchs=20 decreased notably, especially bat rays (from 727 to 31) and leopard = sharks (from=20 100 to 44). Species with substantial increases in catch were fall-run = chinook=20 salmon (from 20 to 154) and white croaker (from 5 to 41). Mitten crabs = (28) were=20 captured for the first time in the trammel net in 1998.
Raymond Schaffter, = Department of Fish=20 and Game
The Juvenile Sturgeon = Setline Survey=20 targets juvenile sturgeon from 40 to 116 cm total length. Fish are = captured with=20 baited setlines, each with 80 hooks, fished overnight at 21 locations in = the=20 western delta to San Pablo Bay. Sturgeon become vulnerable to this gear = during=20 their second year of life and are probably fully recruited to this = survey=20 between the ages of three and ten. The length frequency of juvenile = sturgeon=20 captured in setlines, when aged using an age-length key, provides an = earlier=20 estimate of year-class strength than can be obtained from the adult = tagging=20 study (which targets fish 12 years of age) and augments the year-class = index we=20 have developed from the San Francisco Bay Outflow Study trawl data.
We conducted two = surveys in 1998:=20 August 10-19 and November 3-13. All 21 sites were sampled during the = August=20 survey; three sites in Suisun Bay were not sampled during the November = survey.=20 Catch during the August survey averaged 5.4 sturgeon/setline, similar to = our=20 1996-1997 average of 5.3 sturgeon per setline. November catch was only = 0.8=20 sturgeon per setline. The August catch per setline was not significantly = different than 1996 and 1997 catches in all months (F =3D 0.51; df =3D = 2, 104; P=20 >0.60, on square-root-transformed catch data to equalize variances). = However,=20 when both months of 1998 catch-per-setline data were compared with = earlier=20 years, the 1998 mean of 3.0 sturgeon per setline was significantly lower = than=20 1996 and 1997 catches (F =3D 6.29; df =3D 2, 122; P <0.01) due to low = catches in=20 November 1998.
The likely cause of = unusually low=20 catches in November 1998 was rapid loss of bait to the burgeoning = population of=20 mitten crabs in the western delta and Suisun Bay. In previous years, we = had to=20 cut old bait from most hooks before rebaiting and resetting. However, in = August=20 1998, 20% to 80% of retrieved hooks were bare; the highest proportion of = bare=20 hooks was in the lower San Joaquin River and Suisun Bay. During the = November=20 survey, virtually all hooks were bare from all sites upstream of San = Pablo Bay.=20 In August, much bait probably lasted long enough for the normal twenty- = to=20 twenty-two-hour fishing period and resulted in average catches. By = November, our=20 effective fishing period was substantially reduced because of bait = stealing by=20 mitten crabs. The futility of fishing our gear in the area upstream of = San Pablo=20 Bay led to the decision to delete three Suisun Bay sampling sites in=20 November.
We intend to spot = sample in 1999 to=20 determine if loss of bait to mitten crabs continues to prevent adequate = sampling=20 of juvenile sturgeon with setlines. If severe bait stealing continues, = we will=20 have to use other methods, such as beam or large otter trawls, to sample = juvenile sturgeon.
Richard N. Oltmann, US = Geological=20 Survey
The transducer track = at the San=20 Joaquin River at Jersey Point UVM site that had been mysteriously broken = off=20 from the piling was replaced and the site was again operational on 6 = October.=20 The other UVM stations successfully collected data throughout the = quarter except=20 for a seventeen-day period at Dutch Slough and an eight-day period at = San=20 Joaquin River at Stockton.
Last quarter's report = described the=20 cooperative hydrodynamic study of the confluence area of the Sacramento = and San=20 Joaquin rivers by DWR and USGS that was initiated by deploying 16 = velocity=20 monitoring stations on 14 and 15 September 1998. On 14 and 16 December, = all of=20 the velocity monitoring equipment was successfully retrieved with = preliminary=20 data retrievals showing no major data gaps. The Middle Slough ADCP was = found=20 buried by about three feet of silt and sand, so although the instrument = operated=20 throughout the period, there is a period of unusable data. During the=20 approximately three-month-long deployment period, over 1,500 tidal flow=20 measurements were collectively made at the nine flow monitoring sites by = USGS=20 and DWR using downward-looking ADCP flow measuring systems. The flow=20 measurements will be used to develop velocity ratings so that tidal flow = time=20 series can be computed. Following are the nine flow monitoring sites: = (1)=20 Sacramento River upstream of Point Sacramento; (2) San Joaquin River = (Broad=20 Slough) upstream of Point Sacramento; (3) Montezuma Slough near = Sacramento=20 River; (4) Middle Slough; (5) New York Slough; (6) Sherman Lake at = Sacramento=20 River; (7) Sherman Lake at Broad Slough (west side of Sherman Lake); (8) = Mayberry Slough; and (9) Mayberry Cut.
USGS and DWR began = discussions=20 concerning the possible expansion of the existing tidal flow monitoring = network=20 using two-beam, side-looking ADCPs (SL-ADCP); refer to the last two = quarterly=20 reports for discussions of SL-ADCPs. The list of possible new tidal flow = monitoring sites includes Grant Line Canal at Tracy Road Bridge, the = intake=20 channel to Clifton Court Forebay, Old River at head, San Joaquin River = at Port=20 of Stockton (Rough and Ready Island), Turner Cut, Columbia Cut, = Connection=20 Slough, and Little Potato Slough-Mokelumne River area.
Chris Enright, Department = of Water=20 Resources
The Delta Simulation = Model Project=20 Work Team met twice during the quarter. The mission of the PWT is to = produce (1)=20 a consensus calibration of the DSM2 model along with calibration = documentation=20 and (2) a white paper on error bounds under alternative modes of = planning=20 analysis. Completion of the project has been promised to the IEP = coordinators by=20 December 1999. Staff and students from USGS, USBR, MWD, CCWD, DWR, = Stanford=20 University, and UC Berkeley are regularly contributing to the = effort.
The group is presently = working on=20 several fronts to (1) collect flow data, (2) develop calibration = protocols, (3)=20 develop a model grid geometry, and (4) investigate the sensitivity of = the model=20 to various input parameters. Flow data will be used to guide grid = geometry=20 decisions and calibrate and verify the model. The calibration protocols = are=20 being designed to foster group participation in the calibration and = provide=20 goodness-of-fit measures. Model grid development is the art of resolving = complex=20 three-dimensional bathymetry data into a form with which a = one-dimensional model=20 can produce accurate results. Parameter sensitivity analysis is = concerned with=20 tuning the model for accurate results while minimizing computational = effort, and=20 determining the best methods for simulating complex features of the = system like=20 open water areas. As consensus decisions are reached on these issues, = the group=20 will document the decision process for the final report.
The PWT is planning a = presentation=20 for the Bay-Delta Modeling Forum and presenting a poster for the IEP = Workshop at=20 Asilomar in February.
Jerry Morinaka, = Department of Fish and=20 Game
We sampled fish = entrained at the=20 Rock Slough intake of the Contra Costa Canal once a week in October, = November,=20 and December using a sieve net. Threadfin shad (Dorosoma petenense), = mean size =3D=20 54 mm fork length (FL), and white catfish (Ictaluras catus), mean size = =3D 369 mm=20 FL, were the predominant species captured in the sieve net. One = winter-run-sized=20 juvenile chinook salmon, 83 mm FL, was captured on 10 December. Fish = entrainment=20 sampling was suspended in mid-December due to the theft of essential = equipment=20 at the sampling site and will not resume until the equipment is replaced = sometime in January.
Jerry Morinaka, = Department of Fish and=20 Game
We sampled fish = entrained on the=20 downstream side of the fish screens at the Old River Fish Screen = Facility once a=20 week in October, November, and December using a sieve net. During a = four-week=20 period in November and December, no entrainment sampling was conducted = because=20 repairs were made to the net and the pumping facility was shutdown due = to high=20 chloride levels in the water. Very few fish were captured in the sieve = net=20 during the three months. Comparing the size of the captured fish with = the mesh=20 size of the fish screens leads us to believe that these fish were most = likely=20 entrained at the larval stage and had grown up inside the facility. = Bluegill=20 (Lepomis macrochirus), mean size =3D 54 mm FL, and white catfish = (Ictaluras=20 catus), mean size =3D 57 mm FL, were the only species captured in the = sieve net.=20 Fish entrainment sampling will increase to up to three times a week from = January=20 through June.
Jerry Morinaka, = Department of Fish and=20 Game
The Contra Costa Water = District=20 initiated pumping at the Mallard Slough intake on 10 December. No = sampling was=20 conducted in December at the pumping plant due to the intermittent = pumping=20 schedule. Sampling is scheduled to start during the first week of = January and=20 will continue once a week until the pumping is discontinued.
Randall Baxter, = Department of Fish and=20 Game
Field work for = 1998-1999 began in=20 earnest in December as personnel began hook-and-line fishing for = splittail in=20 the Sacramento River near Ryde (river mile 24.5). In 12 partial days of = fishing=20 through 30 December, 24 splittail were landed. Six of these fish were = radio=20 tagged and released, and nine others were transported to a holding = facility at=20 Hood to be used as either "dummy" tagged or untagged "control" fish. The = remainder, too small to radio tag, received anchor tags and were = released on=20 site. Splittail catch peaked mid-month coincident with high river flows = then=20 dropped to zero on 29 and 30 December. Though initially less productive = than we=20 hoped, angling and tagging will continue through February.
Radio tracking = conducted three days=20 a week between Rio Vista and Hood, indicated that most if not all tagged = fish=20 dropped downstream below Rio Vista after tagging. However, we still need = to=20 download a fixed telemetry site at Hood to confirm that some of these = fish did=20 not move back upstream over the Christmas holiday.
Fish held at Hood are = being checked=20 two to three times per week to assess impacts of handling, tagging, and = fish=20 size on survival. Out of necessity some fish tagged will be smaller than = recommended in the literature (in other words, larger tag weight to fish = weight=20 ratio), so we need to conduct our own assessment. So far of three = internal tag,=20 three external tag and three control fish, only one internally tagged = fish has=20 died. This fish flipped off the table during surgery, so its demise was=20 expected.
By early February we = expect to=20 expand our tracking survey area to include the lower Yolo Bypass, = American and=20 Feather rivers, and the Sacramento River to at least Knights Landing. = Sampling=20 for adults and larvae on suspected spawning grounds will commence in mid = to late=20 February.
Kathy Hieb, Department of = Fish and=20 Game
Preliminary 1998 = abundance indices=20 have been calculated for many of the commonly collected fish and = crustaceans=20 from the San Francisco Estuary. This article includes 1998 highlights = for a=20 subset of this group; a summary of the status and trends for the entire = group=20 will be included in the spring 1999 issue of the IEP Newsletter.
In 1998, the annual = abundance index=20 of juvenile bay shrimp, Crangon franciscorum, was the highest for the = study=20 period (1980-1998). This index has increased steadily since 1995, with = indices=20 of 195 in 1995, 337 in 1996, 508 in 1997, and 588 in 1998. This pattern = is most=20 likely a result of successive high freshwater outflow years. From May = through=20 July, densities of juvenile C. franciscorum were highest in San Pablo = Bay; the=20 center of distribution slowly moved upstream with decreasing outflow, = and by=20 October, densities were highest in Carquinez Strait and western Suisun = Bay.
Abundance of age-0 = longfin smelt=20 increased substantially in 1998 from 1997 (the Bay Study midwater trawl = index=20 was 62,959 in 1998 versus 4,583 in 1997); this increase was also = observed in the=20 1998 Fall Midwater Trawl Survey and Bay Study otter trawl indices. Age-0 = longfin=20 smelt were concentrated in San Pablo Bay through July and began to = disperse in=20 August. By November, they were collected from south of the Dumbarton = Bridge in=20 South Bay to the lower Sacramento River, with the highest catches from = Suisun=20 Bay to Sherman Island.
There has been a = modest recovery of=20 the starry flounder population in the San Francisco Estuary since 1995=20 (abundance was very low during the late 1980s and early 1990s); the 1998 = age-0=20 index was very similar to the 1995-1997 indices while the 1998 age-1 = index (1997=20 year class) was the highest since 1984. Although the age-0 fish were=20 concentrated in San Pablo Bay 1998, they were widely dispersed. Fish = were=20 collected from the southern portion of South Bay to the San Joaquin = River near=20 Venice Island, which is the upstream limit of our sampling.
The 1998 Pacific = herring age-0 index=20 was relatively low, probably as a result of poor broodstock condition = due to El=20 Ni=F1o and transport of larvae from the estuary by high winter outflows. = Northern=20 anchovy abundance has been relatively stable from 1995 to 1998, with the = annual=20 indices ranging from 4,426 to 6,220. These recent indices are 30% to 45% = of the=20 highest index, which was 14,240 in 1993. Although Pacific sardine = abundance was=20 again high in 1998, the index was several orders of magnitude lower than = the=20 northern anchovy index. Interestingly, 80% of our 1998 Pacific sardine = catch was=20 from May. After a slight rebound in 1997, abundance of age-0 shiner = perch was=20 again low in 1998. This continues a trend of decreased abundance since = the=20 mid-1980s.
Bob Fujimura, Department = of Fish and=20 Game
Field collection for = delta smelt=20 used in fish performance experiments at the UC Davis Fish Treadmill were = initiated on 4 August 1998 and are scheduled to continue until early = January=20 1999. The field collection method was the same used in fall 1997; live = delta=20 smelt were obtained using a small purse seine. Effort was taken to = reduce=20 delayed mortality by avoiding fish impingement or dewatering during the = removal=20 of fish from the net, reducing physical shocks during transport, and = minimizing=20 the transport time.
Fewer delta smelt were = collected in=20 1998 compared to 1997. More than 1,700 delta smelt were collected in = 1997 versus=20 less than 1,500 smelt caught in 1998. Sampling effort was increased to = obtain=20 suitable numbers of fish for experimentation. Over twice the number of=20 collection trips were conducted in 1998 and sampling was extended later = in the=20 calendar year. Most fish were collected from a broad area from Suisun = Bay to=20 Honker Bay. In the previous year, smelt were found mostly upstream in = the=20 Sacramento River near Sherman Island.
The field collection = for juvenile=20 splittail was discontinued in spring 1998. Suitable numbers of fish were = obtained from fish salvage collections at the USBR Tracy Fish Facility. = In 1999,=20 juvenile splittail were caught using a beach seine from the Sacramento = River=20 near Sacramento. Collections of juvenile American shad were also made = from the=20 fish salvage operations at the DWR Skinner Fish Protective Facility in = summer=20 1998.
Bob Fujimura, Department = of Fish and=20 Game
Field monitoring of = fall-run chinook=20 salmon passage at the Suisun Marsh Salinity Control Gates (SMSCG) began = on 1=20 October and was completed in early November. Prior to the study, a = detailed=20 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) was written and later submitted to = the=20 SMSCG Steering Group. The purpose of the 1998 study was to monitor the = adult=20 salmon movement through the SMSCG during three operational phases. The = three=20 phases were performed to evaluate the effectiveness of flashboards with=20 horizontal slots to enhance passage of migrating fish. At the beginning = of each=20 phase, 66 fish were caught with drift nets, tagged with ultrasonic = transmitters,=20 and released downstream of the SMSCG. Tagged fish were allowed a minimum = of=20 eight days to pass the SMSCG. A total of 198 adult salmon was fitted = with=20 ultrasonic tags. Fifty-four of these tags also transmitted the depth of = the=20 tagged fish. Stationary receivers and hydrophones were used to detect = the=20 approach and passage of tagged fish. Small battery-powered computers = recorded=20 the tag information and time-stamped each detection.
The raw data files = from the=20 stationary receivers have been converted to more useful data formats and = the=20 initial data editing and summarization has begun. Data entry and = correction of=20 supporting field (boat) monitoring observations are being currently = performed.=20 The percentage of fish that successfully pass during each operational = phase, the=20 mean passage time, and the depth of fish approaching or passing the = SMSCG, is=20 the primary information to be obtained from these data. Preliminary = results and=20 edited datasets are expected by mid-April. Additional analyses will be = conducted=20 to determine whether modified hydrophones can provide information on = small scale=20 movement at the SMSCG, and whether fish movement was associated with = gate=20 operations or environmental variables.
Bob Fujimura, Department = of Fish and=20 Game
The DFG Fish = Facilities research=20 staff is conducting the second year of research on the use of miniature=20 telemetry transmitters to track juvenile salmon through the delta. In = 1998,=20 field trials indicated that ultrasonic tags had greater reception ranges = than=20 comparable radio tags when used at moderate depths or in brackish water. = Captive=20 fish implanted with dummy ultrasonic tags and held at the DWR Skinner = Fish=20 Facility suggested that fish no smaller than 150 to 160 mm could be = tagged=20 without excessive mortality or change in behavior.
Research in 1999 will = focus on=20 evaluating a smaller prototype ultrasonic tag for use on juvenile = chinook salmon=20 smaller than 160 mm. A preliminary field trial indicates that this tag = has a=20 suitable reception range. A holding facility for the second captive fish = experiment has been built at the DWR facility at Hood. Dummy tags will = be used=20 on hatchery fish and held for 14 days. The survival and behavior of the = tagged=20 fish will be compared against control fish. Fish with surgical and = gastric=20 implanted tags will be examined. If the dummy tag results are favorable, = a pilot=20 field evaluation of released fish with active tags will be = proposed.
Sheila Greene, Department = of Water=20 Resources
The Genetics PWT met = on 2 December=20 1998. The principal investigator of the UCD genetics project, Dennis = Hedgecock,=20 presented results from their recent research activities. They have = completed=20 investigations for integrity within each run's baseline and prepared a=20 preliminary updated genetic relatedness tree. There were a few = interesting=20 features: Feather River Hatchery fall-run chinook salmon and Merced = in-river=20 fall-run chinook salmon are slightly distinct from other Central Valley = fall=20 runs; Butte Creek spring-run chinook salmon are distinct from Mill and = Deer=20 creek spring-run salmon (as has been since the beginning); winter-run = chinook=20 salmon are relatively distinct from other Central Valley runs. Although = there=20 are reports of historical introduction of Feather River Hatchery = spring-run=20 chinook salmon into Butte Creek, there is no genetic evidence of = introgression=20 at this time.
Bodega Marine = Laboratory completed=20 genetic analysis of samples collected in 1995 from the delta export = facilities=20 and delta monitoring programs samples collected in 1995. They used the=20 individual analysis to identify winter-run chinook. Winter-run length=20 frequencies were plotted against time to examine size and temporal = distribution.=20 Most individual winter-run chinook were within or near the winter-run = chinook=20 length criteria range. There were also a lot of non-winter-run chinook = in the=20 winter-run chinook length range. There are a couple of interesting = results:=20 several fry-sized winter-run chinook salmon juveniles occurred in = January (we=20 traditionally consider these fall-run or spring-run fry); and a couple = of=20 smolt-sized winter-run chinook salmon occurred in May (we traditionally = have=20 considered these fall-run or spring-run smolts).
The PWT is reviewing = the preliminary=20 results and optimizing the tissue sampling program.
Randall Brown, Department = of Water=20 Resources
The team met in = December and, among=20 other items, discussed the following:
From June 1998 to = December 1998, we=20 established a preliminary positive correlation between the isotopic = ratio of=20 strontium (87Sr/86Sr) in hatchery waters and the 87Sr/86Sr ratio in the = otoliths=20 of juvenile chinook salmon raised in those waters. If this relationship = holds,=20 strontium isotopic analysis will be a useful technique for determining = salmon=20 origin in the Sacramento-San Joaquin basin because there is a range of = distinct=20 87Sr/86Sr ratios among the primary salmon rivers. We are conducting = additional=20 analyses to better understand this correlation and determine its = robustness for=20 management applications.
Suzanne DeLe=F3n, = Department of Fish and=20 Game
In summer and fall = 1998, we=20 continued to sample a variety of tidal marsh habitats in northern = Napa-Sonoma=20 Marsh and the lower Petaluma River marshes. The minifykes we designed in = 1995=20 were fished in first-, second-, and third-order channels. Other = quantitative=20 sampling techniques included block net, beach seine, and cast net in the = larger=20 third order channels, and throw cage and fyke trap in vegetated areas. = This=20 year, sampling was also conducted in nearby open water habitats and in=20 vegetation adjacent to open water. A beach seine, purse seine, beam = trawl, and=20 cast net were used to sample the fourth- and fifth-order channels and = open=20 water. A new gear type, the bottomless lift net, was designed and tested = in=20 emergent vegetation and in mudflats. Gear comparison tests were = conducted for=20 the cast net and throw cage in shallow water ponds and mudflats, and the = fyke=20 trap and lift net in emergent vegetation.
In the lower Petaluma = River,=20 yellowfin goby (Acanthogobius flavimanus), an introduced species, was = common in=20 all habitats sampled. Resident marsh species, including threespine = stickleback=20 (Gasterosteus aculeatus) and longjaw mudsucker (Gillichthys mirabilis) = dominated=20 the small, first- and second-order channels. In emergent vegetation next = to open=20 water, yellowfin goby and threespine stickleback were most abundant. In = the open=20 mudflat of the Sonoma Land Trust Marsh, splittail (Pogonichthys = macrolepidotus),=20 yellowfin goby, and Pacific staghorn sculpin (Leptocottus armatus) were = most=20 common.
In northern = Napa-Sonoma Marsh,=20 prickly sculpin (Cottus asper), threespine stickleback and the recently=20 introduced shimofuri goby (Tridentiger bifasciatus) were most abundant = in the=20 first- and second-order channels. In the large, third-order channels, = inland=20 silverside (Menidia beryllina), prickly sculpin, and splittail dominated = the=20 catch. In emergent vegetation, shimofuri and yellowfin gobies were most=20 abundant, and in a shallow water pond controlled by a tide gate, inland=20 silverside and rainwater killifish (Lucania parva) dominated the=20 catch.
Tanya Veldhuizen, = Department of Water=20 Resources
The IEP Management = Team and=20 Coordinators approved the formation of a Chinese mitten crab Project = Work Team=20 (PWT). The growing interest in the effects of a large and widely = distributed=20 Chinese mitten crab population has heightened the need for a forum to = address=20 concerns and coordinate research activities. The diversity of = disciplines (for=20 example, engineering, biology, and toxicology) required to address the = various=20 Chinese mitten crab issues (see next paragraph) and the participation of = many=20 organizations not normally involved in IEP activities (for example, = Department=20 of Food and Agriculture, Department of Health Services, Contra Costa = Water=20 District, reclamation districts, universities, and private consulting = firms)=20 favored the formation of a new stand-alone PWT as opposed to forming = subgroups=20 under existing PWTs. The new PWT will consist of a parent group and = several=20 satellite groups formed around relevant issues (for example, ecology, = levee=20 integrity, diversions, public health, agriculture, and so on). The = parent group=20 will facilitate communication and coordination among the satellite = groups.
The Chinese mitten = crab PWT is=20 charged to address the following major issues:
The Chinese mitten = crab PWT held its=20 first meeting on 19 January 1999. For more information about the PWT = contact=20 Tanya Veldhuizen (tanyav@water.ca.gov) or Zachary Hymanson=20 (zachary@water.ca.gov).
Erin Sauls, US Fish and = Wildlife=20 Service
Juvenile chinook = salmon monitoring=20 was conducted throughout the Central Valley. The following data covers = efforts=20 in Mill, Deer, and Butte creeks, at Red Bluff Diversion Dam in the = delta, and at=20 Mossdale on the San Joaquin River.
The upper Sacramento = River=20 tributaries of Mill, Deer, and Butte creeks were sampled for spring-run = chinook=20 salmon emigrants using rotary screw traps during fall 1998. The Big = Chico Creek=20 traps have been delayed but are scheduled to go in the second week of = January.=20 The traps in Mill Creek began sampling on 27 October, were out from 30 = November=20 until 11 December, and are now currently sampling. Chinook catches have = been low=20 on Mill Creek, with a maximum catch of three fish on 16 December. Deer = Creek=20 traps also began sampling on 27 October with the first chinook capture = of five=20 fish on 9 November. Numbers of mostly yearling-sized chinook were steady = but low=20 until 26 were captured on 23 November. The catch (more fry than = yearlings)=20 peaked on 14 December (74 fish) and has gradually decreased. The Butte = Creek=20 traps started sampling on 1 October and captured the first chinook = salmon on 10=20 October. Low numbers were observed until 22 November when 39 fish were = captured,=20 then steadily increased with a peak of 9,882 fish observed on 14 = December. About=20 1,000 fish per day have been seen since that date.
Rotary screw trap = monitoring at Red=20 Bluff Diversion Dam (RBDD) began on 1 September and was fully = implemented at=20 seven days per week starting in October. Concerns of exceeding our = winter-run=20 chinook salmon take necessitated the implementation of a nighttime = subsampling=20 regimen. The following interpretations are for catches through 5 = December and=20 have been extrapolated to nighttime periods that were not fished. Salmon = captured in rotary screw traps at RBDD ranged in fork length from 28 to = 173 mm.=20 Over 90% of the chinook salmon captured were winter-run-sized, while = late=20 fall-run- (3.0%), spring-run- (2.8%), and fall-run-sized (1.3%) chinook = salmon=20 comprised smaller portions of the total catch. Brood year 1997 (BY97) = fall-run=20 chinook were observed throughout September and October at RBDD with the = final=20 BY97 capture occurring 12 November 1998. Relative abundance of = winter-run=20 chinook peaked in late September at over 550 fish per trap over a=20 twenty-four-hour period. Abundance patterns in October and November were = relatively static except for increases in abundance during periods of = increased=20 river flows and water turbidity during autumn freshets. Our total BY98=20 winter-run chinook take (n=3D15,754) by 5 December 1998 exceeded our = total take of=20 BY97 winter-run chinook by over 2,000 fish. Although take between years = is not=20 directly comparable because of different fishing intensities, it = demonstrates=20 the high abundance patterns observed this year for winter run. Other = items of=20 interest occurring during this period included the capture of a 335 mm=20 Sacramento splittail on 28 October 1998. Additionally, naturally = produced=20 fall-run chinook salmon captured during January, February, and March = 1999 will=20 be retained, adipose fin-clipped, and marked with coded wire tags as = part of a=20 multiyear, wild-stock-tagging program being conducted by the Northern = Central=20 Valley Fish and Wildlife Office. For additional information on the screw = trap=20 monitoring at RBDD, please contact craig_martin@fws.gov.
Rotary screw traps at = Knights=20 Landing began sampling on 1 October. The first chinook salmon was = captured on 5=20 October. Catches (mostly yearlings) were sporadic until 12 November when = a catch=20 of 21 chinook salmon was made. Chinook catches steadily increased (the = traps=20 were not fishing from 25 November until 30 November) to a peak of 260 = (mostly=20 fry) fish on 6 December. Catch numbers are currently decreasing at = Knights=20 Landing.
Sacramento Kodiak = trawling began for=20 the season on 3 September. Twenty-four late fall-run, 11 spring-run, 2 = fall-run=20 and 73 winter-run-sized chinook salmon have been captured through 28 = December.=20 This number of winter-run chinook is higher than last season's = recoveries during=20 the same period. Our first winter-run-sized capture occurred on 22 = September in=20 the beach seine at Clarksburg (river mile 43). The Delta Cross Channel = closed on=20 8 September due to high flows and remained closed in order to protect = emigrants=20 from diversion off of the mainstem Sacramento River. The total delta=20 winter-run-sized catch through December reached 393 fish (trawling and = beach=20 seining efforts combined).
Kodiak trawling three = days per week=20 on the San Joaquin River at Mossdale began on 4 November. No salmon were = detected through the end of December. Winter-run-sized chinook salmon = were first=20 detected leaving the delta at Chipps Island on 1 December. A total of 12 = chinook=20 was captured at Chipps Island during this quarter. Incidental take of = delta=20 smelt started to climb in late October, which limited the trawling = effort under=20 Endangered Species Act restrictions. To avoid capturing delta smelt, = sampling=20 was conducted on a pilot basis at an alternate site near the Benicia = Bridge in=20 lower Suisun Bay with little success in capturing chinook salmon.
A late-fall chinook = salmon, coded=20 wire tag experiment is underway to evaluate the potential effects of = State and=20 federal project exports on juvenile chinook salmon survival through the = central=20 delta. These late-fall, hatchery chinook are used as surrogates for = spring-run=20 and winter-run chinook, which also emigrate during this period. Paired = releases=20 were made in early and late December at Ryde (Sacramento River mainstem) = and=20 Georgiana Slough, assuming that low to moderate outflow and low export = levels=20 (less than 2,000 cfs) following both sets of releases will provide good=20 conditions in the south delta and result in similar survival indices for = the=20 Georgiana Slough groups relative to the Ryde groups. Two sets of = releases under=20 the same flow and export conditions will provide a replicate of this = data point,=20 which is difficult to achieve. The Delta Cross Channel will be closed = during=20 both test periods. A control group was released at Port Chicago on 22 = December=20 for independent survival verification by way of ocean recoveries. = Preliminary=20 recoveries of the first set of releases still show a significant = survival=20 advantage for the Ryde group. Due to heavy rainfall, flows in the lower=20 Sacramento River were very high (up to about 60,000 cfs) during the = recovery=20 period, which changed the experimental conditions. Flows are expected to = be much=20 lower during the replicate. Survival indices will be calculated after = all=20 recoveries have been made. The salvage facilities at the State Water = Project=20 have recovered two Georgiana Slough fish and no Ryde fish from the first = set of=20 releases.
Dale Sweetnam, Department = of Fish and=20 Game
The third delta smelt = workshop was=20 completed on 1 and 2 October. Although it was not well attended, the = conference=20 offered quality research that was well received. A prioritized list of = future=20 delta smelt research needs including those of CALFED and the CMARP = process was=20 assembled by both agency and stakeholder representatives. A full = description of=20 the workshop is included in this newsletter. (See "The Third Delta Smelt = Workshop".)
The fall midwater = trawl survey was=20 finally completed on 22 December. Numerous boat breakdowns and harsh = weather=20 resulted in only 77% of the scheduled stations being sampled in = December. The=20 index for December was 70.1. This sets the annual fall index (the sum of = the=20 September through December indices), at 417.6, slightly greater than the = 1997=20 index of 360.8. Distribution was centered in Suisun Bay with few fish = found in=20 the San Pablo Bay and the lower Sacramento River. One interesting point = about=20 the 1998 index is that it breaks the "odd-even year" fluctuation that = has been=20 observed in the 1990s.
George Parker and Jane = Arnold,=20 Department of Fish and Game
In September and = October, the number=20 of mitten crabs (Eriocheir sinensis) entering the John E. Skinner Delta = Fish=20 Protective Facility (Skinner Fish Facility) was estimated to be over = 20,000 per=20 day. This large number of crabs impacted normal salvage fish operations = and=20 additional DWR and DFG staff were brought on to handle the extra work. = To reduce=20 the number of crabs in each truck load of fish, up to four fish hauls = were done=20 in a twenty-four-hour period and crabs were cleaned out of the holding = tanks at=20 regular intervals. Despite the best efforts of DWR and DFG staff to = control the=20 numbers of crabs, every crab could not be eliminated from the bucket = used to=20 load fish into the truck. At times, some fish died in the loading = bucket,=20 possibly because of the stress of being crowded by crabs, or because the = amount=20 of dissolved oxygen (DO) reached critical levels.
To test if mitten = crabs could indeed=20 deplete DO levels, some initial tests were performed by DFG staff at the = Skinner=20 Fish Facility. Various numbers of crabs were held for 90 minutes in a = 439-liter=20 tank of ambient water, while a control tank with no crabs was tested=20 simultaneously. DO levels did drop markedly in the tank containing = mitten crabs,=20 especially when the test tank contained more than 70 crabs. These = initial tests=20 indicate as few as 1,600 mitten crabs in the fish-hauling truck (2,500 = gallons)=20 could reduce DO to lethal levels for salvaged fish. The bucket used to = transfer=20 fish from the holding tanks to the truck holds a mere 500 gallons, thus = the fish=20 mortality noted earlier may have been due solely to low DO levels rather = than=20 any direct interaction between fish and crabs. More tests are planned = and a=20 final report is expected by fall 1999.
Jim Orsi, Department of = Fish and=20 Game
A third species of = east Asian mysid=20 has been identified from specimens taken in San Pablo Bay by the=20 Neomysis/Zooplankton Study. Dr. Richard Modlin of the University of = Alabama=20 searched the literature and determined that our specimens were = Acanthomysis=20 hwanhaiensis, a native of Korea. This species was found from South San = Francisco=20 Bay to San Pablo Bay in September 1997, our first lower bays survey and = was the=20 most abundant mysid present at this time. Its high abundance (maximum = 36/m3) and=20 widespread distribution indicate that it must have been introduced prior = to=20 1997. We also caught A. hwanhaiensis in 1998. Prior to the 1997 sampling = we had=20 not sampled these bays since 1976, when we only caught a few Neomysis = mercedis.=20 Still unidentified are several juvenile mysids of still another species = taken in=20 San Pablo Bay last year. Adults are needed for species = identification.
Prior to the catch of = the Korean=20 species we had one species each from China and Japan, as well as one = species of=20 cryptic origin, Deltamysis holmquistae. We also have six native mysids, = only=20 three of which have been taken in our samples.
Acanthomysis bowmani = was=20 surprisingly abundant in October in Suisun Slough; its abundance reached = 179/m3.=20 It was also abundant in November in the San Joaquin River at Stockton = where=20 49/m3 were captured. Neomysis mercedis was rare; its greatest abundance = was only=20 0.7/m3 at Stockton in November. It was found at only three stations in = October=20 and November, but this is an improvement since none were captured in = these=20 months in 1997.
Jim Orsi, Department of = Fish and=20 Game
Limnoithona tetraspina = was the most=20 abundant copepod in October and November, but was much less abundant = than it was=20 in 1997. Pseudodiaptomus forbesi was second most abundant. Eurytemora = began to=20 appear in October as it normally does, but did not become abundant = anywhere we=20 sampled. Notable was the very low abundance of Tortanus, which was not = found in=20 San Pablo Bay as would be expected, but at Martinez and in western = Suisun Bay=20 instead. Acartiella sinensis was only about a tenth as abundant in 1997. = Sinocalanus, Diaptomus, and Cyclops were the only copepods more abundant = in 1998=20 than in 1997. Cladocerans and rotifers were somewhat more abundant in = 1997.
Carole McIvor (US = Geological Survey),=20 Larry Brown (US Bureau of Reclamation), and Zachary Hymanson (Department = of=20 Water Resources)
On 24 June 1998 the = IEP,=20 representatives from the IEP Science Advisory Group (C. McIvor, J. = Cloern, S.=20 Monismith), CALFED, and several independent researchers held a day-long = workshop=20 on shallow water habitat. The meeting took place at the USGS office in = Menlo=20 Park, California and was attended by 27 people. The agenda was an = ambitious one=20 and included the following goals:
This summary covers = goals 2 and 4=20 explicitly, and goals 1, 3, and 5 peripherally and in less = detail.
During the year prior = to this=20 workshop, several important issues have emerged concerning shallow water = habitat=20 in the estuary, which included the following:
This meeting was = convened to provide=20 a forum for the discussion (and in some cases resolution) of these = issues. The=20 meeting also served as a means to provide the IEP with input to help = guide its=20 work on shallow water habitat in the estuary.
Larry Brown (USBR) = presented working=20 definitions of shallow water habitat relevant to the San Francisco Bay = and the=20 Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. (Larry's white paper, along with an = evaluation of=20 the potential importance of shallow water habitat to fish and other = aquatic=20 organisms in the estuary, is available at www.iep.ca.gov/eet/.) = According to=20 Cowardin and others (1979), shallow water habitat is water less than 2 = m, often=20 coinciding with the limit of emergent vegetation. Conversely, the USEPA = (1997)=20 defines shallow water habitat as being water less than 4 m, including = estuaries=20 and coastal waters. Larry's recommendation was to use both definitions = as=20 follows: less than 2 m for marshes, wetlands, and sloughs; less than 4 m = from=20 open water shoals. The general consensus was one of agreement with this=20 recommendation with some minor changes noted below.
A second consideration = of Larry's=20 presentation was the question of why there has been relatively little = attention=20 given to such shallow water habitats in past bay-delta monitoring and = research.=20 Three reasons were given. First, until quite recently, research and = monitoring=20 has focused on more open water species of concern (including striped = bass and=20 salmon), which are believed to use primarily deeper channel habitats. = Second,=20 the sampling gears used in the past for channel species were simply not=20 appropriate for use in shallower waters. Third, is the perceived = scarcity of=20 good quantitative methods for sampling shallow water habitat, especially = in and=20 around vegetation. Overall, the lack of interest in shallow water = habitats=20 earlier in the IEP program was largely driven by interest in defining = the roles=20 of flow and diversions in controlling production of striped bass, = salmon, and=20 other species that were not believed to rely heavily on shallow water = habitat=20 for completion of their life cycles. Stated in another way, shallow = water=20 habitat was not believed to be a limiting factor on any of the = populations of=20 interest.
A third component of = Larry's=20 presentation was a proposed categorization of shallow water habitat to=20 facilitate communication among researchers, managers, and the public. = Larry=20 proposed the following categories:
Whereas there was = general acceptance=20 and approval of the utility of these distinctions, there were questions = about=20 the geographic area covered by these definitions, especially in relation = to=20 plans for restoration. Are these categories only supposed to apply to = the=20 estuary (Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, Suisun Bay, and San Francisco = Bay) or=20 were other areas included? This discussion was likely caused by the = inclusion of=20 Yolo Bypass in the draft white paper. The bypass is an important shallow = water=20 area but it is not (or barely) tidally-influenced during floods, when it = is=20 important to the ecosystem. The draft white paper will be revised to = indicate=20 that the general scope of the definition is the bay-delta estuary. The=20 information on Yolo Bypass will be retained but it will be made clear = that the=20 bypass is a special case.
There was substantial = discussion of=20 scale issues. For example, the perennial versus temporary category can = be=20 interpreted in many ways depending on the time scale used. The = intertidal zone=20 can be viewed as a temporary habitat on the scale of hours. Some marshes = can=20 probably be considered temporary on longer time scales (10 years or = longer)=20 depending on geomorphic and other physical and biological processes. The = intended scale of the first category was seasonal. The intent was to = separate=20 seasonally-flooded, shallow water areas from perennially-flooded, = shallow water=20 areas. This choice of time scale will be made explicit in the revised=20 definition. There was a similar discussion of spatial scale. The point = was made=20 that a small marsh might function very differently from a large marsh.=20 Similarly, a shallow water area associated with an upstream watershed = might=20 function very differently from a similar-sized marsh created from a = flooded=20 island surrounded on all sides by deep channels.
There was much = discussion of=20 hydrodynamic regime and how it could be incorporated into the list. The = simplest=20 method was to define "fast flow" and "slow flow" regimes; however, it is = difficult to objectively define a breakpoint for such a category. The = other=20 suggestion was to classify areas as "flow-through" or "closed." For = example, a=20 flooded island with a single breach would be considered closed, whereas = one with=20 several openings allowing tidal flow through the area would be = considered=20 flow-through. No conclusion was reached on how best to incorporate these = distinctions.
A more general = discussion revolved=20 around the idea that all of the attributes discussed were relative = measures. For=20 example, one could do a study entirely within the shallow water zone, as = defined=20 in the white paper, but still be comparing a relatively deep area with a = shallow=20 area. Further, the idea of relative measures applies to many of the = ideas=20 discussed such as fast versus slow, old versus young, big versus small, = and so=20 on.
There was also some = discussion of=20 the utility of general categories as proposed for the present definition = of=20 shallow water habitat versus very detailed typologies of habitat types = based on=20 both physical and biological attributes. The consensus appeared to be = that=20 detailed typologies are especially useful for tasks such as GIS habitat = mapping.=20 They can also be useful for facilitation of communication but such = typologies=20 require a significant effort on the part of knowledgeable people. Such = an effort=20 has been completed for the bay. Completion of a typology for the delta = would=20 require an expenditure of time and resources beyond the volunteer = efforts=20 completed to date. There also appears to be a much less extensive = database=20 available for delta shallow water habitat, which might make objective=20 delineation of such a typology difficult.
A final suggestion was = made that it=20 might be useful to construct an attribute by species matrix for = delineation of=20 types of shallow water habitat associated with specific species or = species' life=20 stages. Though this exercise would be useful, the data base for = completing such=20 a matrix is currently incomplete and it is doubtful that a significant = portion=20 could be completed. For this reason, the draft white paper explicitly = rejects=20 this species-based approach at present. Nevertheless, such a matrix = might be a=20 useful tool for directing future research by identifying gaps in our=20 knowledge.
At the end of the = discussion, the=20 group concluded that some clarifications and additions could improve the = utility=20 of the habitat classifications. With regard to the geographic area = included, the=20 scheme is intended to apply only to the tidal portion of the bay-delta = estuary=20 with several exceptions. Nontidal, shallow water areas within leveed = areas are=20 included, as are areas where tidal influence is muted or controlled by = water=20 management structures. The Yolo Bypass is included in the draft white = paper=20 because of its importance to estuarine production. Revisions to the = actual=20 definitions included the following: (1) adding nontidal to the = intertidal versus=20 subtidal category; (2) changing the perennial versus temporary category = to=20 permanent vs. seasonal; and (3) adding new categories.
The new categories = added were as=20 follows:
During this section of = the workshop,=20 we heard brief presentations of several studies or activities related to = shallow=20 water habitat. This was not meant to be a comprehensive description of = all=20 activities and studies relating to shallow water habitat occurring in = the=20 estuary. Instead, results from select activities or studies were = presented to=20 stimulate discussion of ideas, questions, and issues.
Terry Mills (CALFED) = presented an=20 overview of the Ecosystem Restoration Program Plan (ERPP) emphasizing = that=20 portion on shallow water habitat, a cornerstone of the restoration plan. = The=20 entire plan comprises two volumes. During ERPP development, CALFED = looked at 65=20 restoration plans based on species, but chose to go with an ecosystem = approach.=20 In Volume 2 of the ERPP, CALFED broke the geographic area into 14 = ecological=20 zones. It is important to emphasize that this two-volume work is not a = science=20 plan, but rather a public disclosure document. The document was = published in=20 March 1998; CALFED restoration activities will take place over at least = the next=20 30 years.
Recommendations in the = ERPP=20 regarding the delta include 125,000 acres of shallow water habitat. = Increases in=20 lower-bay emergent saline wetland habitat are also recommended. It is=20 recommended that approximately 85,000 acres of restored shallow water = habitat=20 occur within the legal delta.
Terry pointed out that = we still need=20 answers to several important questions concerning shallow water = habitat:
Meeting participants = recognized that=20 we do not have complete answers for any of these questions. Most thought = that=20 obtaining answers to these questions should occur before substantial = funds are=20 invested in the restoration of shallow water habitat. Jim Cloern (USGS)=20 expressed concerns as well about the scientific basis for the = restoration of=20 shallow water habitat versus other restoration goals. He pointed out = that there=20 has been insufficient justification given for such great emphasis being = placed=20 on the re-establishment of these habitat types. For example, he asked = what=20 specific ecosystem functions will be enhanced by the establishment of = these=20 different shallow water habitats and will such enhancement increase the=20 likelihood that target species will respond in a positive way? = Additionally, Jim=20 questioned how much a restoration program can alter the size and = functions of=20 shallow water habitat across the entire geographic domain of CALFED's=20 restoration plan (in other words, how large is 7,000 acres of tidal, = perennial=20 aquatic habitat compared to the existing acreage of this habitat type? = Is it=20 reasonable to expect that this action might have a measurable impact? = Pointing=20 out that some ecosystem effects of restoration might be negative, Jim = stated=20 that we know very little about how newly-established shallow regions = might alter=20 the cycling, retention, and trophic transfer of toxic contaminants.
Kathy Hieb (DFG) = reviewed the tidal=20 marsh study. Its goal is to determine how fish, caridean shrimp, and = brachyuran=20 crabs use various marsh habitats in the San Francisco Estuary. Sampling = has been=20 concentrated in the lower Petaluma River and northern Napa Marsh where = several=20 ages or types of marsh are within close proximity. Researchers are using = a=20 variety of methods in a range of habitats--subtidal and intertidal, = vegetated=20 and non-vegetated. They are finding that the marsh plain is not flooded=20 regularly, but that fish are definitely using vegetated edges. = Additionally, the=20 majority of native species have been taken in lower-order channels, with = a=20 mixture of native and exotic species in larger channels. Species = captured behind=20 tide gates are almost exclusively exotic species.
Jessica Lacy (Stanford = University)=20 reported on a study of the hydrodynamics of Honker Bay. There are two = main=20 components of the study: a series of drifter experiments and two = seasonal=20 deployments of instruments to measure time series of velocity, salinity, = temperature, depth, and suspended sediment concentration. The drifter=20 experiments revealed that the residence time of water in most of the bay = is six=20 hours or less. This fact is important for the passive retention of fish = in the=20 bay. Data analysis continues on the seasonal deployment data. However, = there are=20 differences in salinity on the order of 2 to 3 ppt over relatively short = distances.
Bruce Herbold (EPA) = reported on the=20 UC Davis Suisun Marsh fish monitoring. This monthly trawl sampling = program at 21=20 sites distributed among nine sloughs has been in effect since October = 1979. (See=20 Moyle and others 1986 and Meng and others 1994 for more detail.) Native = species=20 are more abundant in smaller, dead-end sloughs. Natives are more = predictable=20 than exotics in distribution and abundance. Exotic species are = ubiquitous but=20 highly variable. The edge community sampled by seines differs and = includes=20 salmon.
Dale Sweetnam (DFG) = summarized the=20 use of shallow water habitat by early life stages of delta smelt. = Project goals=20 are to compare densities between mid-channel areas and shallow areas, = and=20 between surface and bottom portions of the water column. Results to date = indicate that larvae are surface-oriented, juveniles are exclusively so. = Larval=20 smelt are not found in higher densities along shallow shoreline zones. = Future=20 plans are to expand sampling to more geographic areas in the Estuary, = and to=20 deeper channels.
Amy Harris (Surface = Water Resources,=20 Incorporated), gave a preliminary report on the occurrence of juvenile = fish in a=20 natural versus a restored slough in the north delta. Pop nets are = currently=20 being using with mixed success. Qualitatively, it appears that there may = be=20 higher abundance of natives at the natural site.
Charles (Si) Simenstad = (University=20 of Washington) reported on the flooded island study. The study's design = concept=20 is to substitute space for time. A newly restored site goes through = succession=20 or a functional trajectory. Sixteen remnant wetland sites have been = identified=20 in the delta. Additionally, there are distinct geomorphological regions. = Nineteen to 20 sites have been restored naturally or on purpose. These = sites are=20 nested within hydrogeomorphic areas. The study will look at fish use and = food=20 web parameters in the central sites. Physiochemical and hydrogeomorphic=20 parameters will be measured at all sites. The study is paying particular = attention to wetland edges. Additionally, a graduate student is looking = at fish=20 use of two types of floating vegetation (water hyacinth and a native=20 pennywort).
Ted Sommer (DWR) = reported on the=20 Yolo Bypass study. The bypass is in the Sacramento floodplain, and = covers 50,000=20 acres. Fish are using the region in large numbers and density estimates = often=20 exceed those from the adjacent Sacramento River. Researchers are finding = chinook=20 salmon, splittail, and steelhead (species of special concern) in the = bypass.=20 They have looked at agricultural, riparian, and native vegetation = equally and=20 have found that flow is more important in predicting fish usage than is=20 vegetation type. Splittail are spawning in the bypass, as are Sacramento = blackfish. In terms of rearing, growth is faster for a given species in = the=20 bypass than in the river, stomachs are fuller, and water temperatures = are=20 higher. Whereas some fish do strand in the bypass, substantial numbers = make it=20 back to the mainstem river as flood waters recede. In summary, native = fishes=20 seem to do well in this temporary habitat. Additionally, the research = group=20 believes that the Yolo Bypass area is a major source of organic carbon = to the=20 river.
Mike Chotkowski (DFG) = described a=20 new project that seeks to "mine" existing data on fish in shallow water=20 habitats. The first goal is to determine what questions can be asked of = the=20 data, given how, when, and why it was originally collected. This work = just=20 started and results are expected by July 1999.
Amy Harris described a = pilot shallow=20 water habitat restoration project set to occur in the lower Sacramento = River.=20 The project is designed to establish approximately 50 acres of tidal = wetland on=20 Decker Island. The Port of Sacramento will remove sections of the river = bank at=20 the south end of the island to restore natural tidal regime. = Approximately 3,000=20 to 4,000 lineal feet of graduated shallow water channels will be = excavated to=20 restore tidal shallow water habitat. Several mounds (upland refugia) = will also=20 be constructed from excavated material to enhance the microtopography of = the=20 tidal wetland zone and riparian and aquatic habitat diversity. Key = technical=20 questions they hope to address through the monitoring program include = the=20 following:
Collette Zemitis (DWR) = described the=20 Prospect Island restoration project and the resulting monitoring = program. The=20 purpose of the monitoring program is to document ecological processes = and=20 habitat use by targeted species in restored areas of Prospect Island.=20 Approximately 1,200 acres of Prospect Island will be restored by = creating=20 wetland features--a deep channel, shallow dead-end sloughs, and small=20 islands--and will then be flooded to a depth of approximately two feet. = The=20 proposed monitoring includes the following elements: fish, wildlife, = water=20 quality, vegetation, phytoplankton, zooplankton, benthos, bathymetry, = and=20 organic carbon. Conditions in the restored wetland, including species = abundance=20 and distribution, will be compared to adjacent channels. Each element of = the=20 monitoring program will provide data to address specific questions and=20 objectives.
The process of = defining the research=20 questions to guide the development of a research strategy involved = several=20 steps. First, several IEP Project Work Teams and other IEP staff = involved in=20 shallow water monitoring or research were asked to contribute questions = about=20 shallow water habitat. Larry Brown compiled the questions and sent them = to the=20 meeting participants prior to the workshop, requesting them to = prioritize the=20 questions. The participants were also asked to summarize the questions = if they=20 recognized general themes. Larry Brown compiled and summarized = participant=20 feedback into the questions and general comments listed below. These = questions=20 were presented at the meeting to stimulate a discussion and to refine a = list of=20 questions for guiding a research strategy. Additional questions were = added to=20 the existing list as new, broad and specific questions were presented at = the=20 meeting.
Respondents to Larry = Brown's inquiry=20 had several general comments on the conceptual basis of a research = strategy.=20 There was a general consensus that whereas general topics such as = "biology" are=20 appropriate for organizing thoughts, any monitoring or research programs = should=20 be interdisciplinary or cross-disciplinary in nature. Respondents were = also=20 cognizant of the importance of "scale" in investigations, in other = words, the=20 spatial scale of individual project response versus that of ecosystem = response=20 and short-term versus long-term temporal scales on which restoration = success=20 could and should be measured. Further, while recognizing the necessity = and=20 desirability of assessing the response of target species, they also felt = that=20 community and ecosystem response variables should be monitored as well. = They=20 recognized that introduced species are well established in the bay-delta = ecosystem and that they will respond in possibly complex and unknown = ways to=20 restoration activities. Finally, respondents felt that a research = strategy=20 should focus both on the function of existing shallow water habitat and = the=20 design and monitoring of created habitat.
The workshop concluded = with an open=20 discussion of a range of issues related to restoration of shallow water = habitat,=20 from the origin of the term (from Moyle and others 1992 where SHW is = used as=20 synonymous with shoals as opposed to channels), to a reminder that as a = group we=20 are interested in something much more difficult than what shallow water = habitat=20 is, rather we are ultimately interested in trying to assess habitat = quality=20 (Denise Reed, University of New Orleans). One researcher pointed out = that some=20 very effective sampling techniques (for example, electrofishing) are now = discouraged because of concern for threatened and endangered species, = and=20 expressed the hope that study-specific agreements might be reached = allowing use=20 of such techniques. Jessica Lacy (Stanford University) asked if there = are other=20 ways of promoting species by using flows, for example. Someone else = pondered=20 about the appropriate balance in restoration funding for construction = versus=20 funding for monitoring. Si Simenstad pointed out that the portion of our = summary=20 of research questions dealing with primary production needs to be = expanded: at=20 present it appears to be hidden under nutrient cycling. Zachary Hymanson = (DWR)=20 voiced a general concern: "What if restored shallow water habitat ends = up=20 benefiting exotic species?" Bruce Herbold states that the white paper = points out=20 that some shallow water habitat does benefit native species.
Other discussion = involved the time=20 frame necessary to judge the success of restoration. Si Simenstad asked = if we=20 can tolerate the 50-250 year time-frame needed to achieve "restoration." = Voters=20 and society want instantaneous gratification, in other words, instant = native=20 species response. Si knows of no engineered system that has responded to = restoration goals in even 30 years. Leo Winternitz (DWR) states that = Category=20 III funds are an inherent problem in that they allow for only three = years of=20 monitoring. Thus, one gets a picture of a new system only in its = infancy.
A recurring theme = involved what is=20 perceived to be a narrow criterion for success of restoration of shallow = water=20 habitat, in other words, two target fish species (delta smelt and = winter-run=20 chinook salmon). Leo Winternitz expressed concern that if these two = species=20 identified by CALFED as targets do not respond to restoration efforts, = CALFED=20 would interpret that result as a failure of restoration. Si Simenstad = pointed=20 out that the factors affecting salmon performance are varied and = numerous, and=20 operate at scales from the Sierra in California to Japan. He noted that = the fish=20 populations could go up or down for reasons totally unrelated to shallow = water=20 habitat. Pete Rhoads (MWD) pointed out that it is crucial to have = multiple=20 indicators of restoration success. At all costs, avoid thinking solely = of two=20 fish species. Further, it is clear that we must look at trends, not just = success=20 or failure, and that we must think long-term.
Jim Cloern added a = more expanded=20 perspective along these same lines. Jim posited that the call for = restoration of=20 shallow water habitat is based on the implicit belief that in the = current=20 condition of the delta, shallow water habitat limits the recruitment or=20 maintenance of certain fish populations. This presumption may or may not = be=20 true. However, an alternative hypothesis is that fish stocks are = declining in=20 this ecosystem because of the interacting effects of multiple stressors, = including habitat limitations, manipulations of inflow-outflow, = disturbance=20 caused by exotic species, disturbance caused by toxic chemicals, and = changes in=20 the coastal ocean (for migratory species). The scientific community is = far from=20 fully understanding how all these stressors interact to cause = fluctuations in=20 stocks of fish. Let us hope we are not going down a path in which we = make major=20 investments to restore certain habitat types, judge performance only on = the=20 basis of changing fish stocks, and then conclude that restoration = actions were a=20 failure if these stocks do not recover within a certain period of time. = Rather,=20 we must take a broad enough perspective to include other kinds of = performance=20 criteria. For example, if we have identified certain shallow water = functions as=20 being critical to the recruitment of target species, then a more = balanced set of=20 performance criteria would measure those functions directly. Perhaps a=20 meaningful set of performance measures would include things like: = secondary=20 production of forage species such as amphipods or mysid shrimp or native = copepods; the number of river miles of riparian habitat; or the acreage = of=20 habitat suitable for spawning by the target species.
It was clear from the = presentations=20 and discussion of the research questions that the IEP has enough = involvement in=20 shallow water habitat to warrant the formation of a new project work = team. Such=20 formation was suggested during the workshop and there was broad support = for the=20 formation of an interdisciplinary team focusing on shallow water = habitat. A=20 Shallow Water Habitat Project Work Team was subsequently formed and = first met in=20 December 1998. One of this team's initial tasks is to continue the = refinement of=20 the research questions needed to formulate a research strategy. Contact = Mike=20 Chotkowski (mchotkow@delta.dfg.ca.gov) for more information.
Cowardin LM, V = Carter, FC Golet,=20 and ET LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of = the=20 United States. Washington, DC: US Fish and Wildlife Service. = FWS/OBS-79/31. 103=20 p.
Meng L, PB Moyle, and = B Herbold.=20 1994. Changes in abundance and distribution of native and introduced = fishes of=20 Suisun Marsh. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 123:498-507.
Moyle PB, RA Daniels, = B Herbold,=20 and DM Baltz. 1986. Patterns in distribution and abundance of a = noncoevolved=20 assemblage of estuarine fishes in California. Fishery Bulletin=20 84(1):105-117.
Moyle PB, B Herbold, = DE Stevens,=20 and LE Miller. 1992. Life history and status of delta smelt in the=20 Sacramento-San Joaquin Estuary, California. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. = 121:67-77.
USEPA. 1997. = Proceedings of the=20 second marine and shallow water science and management conference. = Philadelphia,=20 PA: US Environmental Protection Agency. EPA/903/R/97009.
Jim Cloern, US Geological = Survey
Scientists from six = universities and=20 the US Geological Survey (USGS) have begun a new project to characterize = the=20 food resource which supports secondary production in different habitats = of the=20 Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. The project is supported by CALFED = Category III,=20 USGS, and the IEP; it is designed to answer basic questions about the = organic=20 matter which supports biological production at the lowest trophic = levels. We=20 know, from the excellent long-term records of IEP agencies, that the = abundance=20 of zooplankton (especially native species) has declined dramatically in = the past=20 three decades. We do not understand the underlying mechanisms of these = declines,=20 but it is likely that they are the result of multiple, interacting = stressors.=20 One potential limitation of secondary production could be a sub-optimal = food=20 resource, manifested either as low quantity or poor nutritional quality = of the=20 available pools of organic matter. Some past studies support this = possibility,=20 especially for the case of benthic macroinvertebrates. The project was = conceived=20 to do the following:
This information is = essential for=20 determining the most effective ecosystem restoration or rehabilitation=20 strategies, particularly for restoring those services or functions = provided by=20 the secondary producers such as cladocerans, copepods, rotifers, = amphipods, and=20 insect larvae. These services include production of forage for priority = fish=20 species listed in the CALFED Ecosystem Restoration Plan.
This new collaborative = project=20 addresses questions that are difficult to answer because there is no = simple=20 assay or measurement that can definitively identify the sources, = quantity,=20 quality, or utilization pathways of organic matter in aquatic = ecosystems. We=20 will approach this problem through a combination of (a) numerical = modeling of=20 the delta ecosystem, (b) analysis of trends of change using results from = the IEP=20 observational program, and (c) a new field study. The field study will = be=20 conducted by the following researchers:
The sampling program = is designed to=20 apply these approaches across the full spectrum of habitat types within = the=20 delta, including flooded islands, the Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers, = small=20 delta sloughs, marsh creeks, intertidal habitat of Suisun Bay, and the=20 delta-estuary interface (at X2). We plan to sample these habitats under = a range=20 of hydrologic conditions and over the seasonal growth cycles of the = primary=20 producers. For example, one target condition will be an event of high = flow when=20 the Yolo Bypass is flooded and delivers large quantities of organic = matter from=20 the Sacramento River basin flood plain.
This new field study = is just one=20 component of the larger group project, which includes the following:=20 retrospective analysis of the long-term IEP data set (led by Professor = Alan=20 Jassby, UC Davis); development of a three-dimensional numerical model of = delta=20 hydrodynamics (Stanford University Professors Jeffrey Koseff and Stephen = Monismith and graduate student Nancy Monsen); and a coupled model of=20 hydrodynamics and phytoplankton-nutrient dynamics in the delta (Dr. Lisa = Lucas,=20 USGS, in collaboration with all other partners of this group project). = Beginning=20 with this issue of the IEP Newsletter we will describe the components of = this=20 CALFED-supported project of focused research.
Elizabeth A. Canuel, The = College of=20 William and Mary
In many marine and = aquatic systems,=20 production at higher trophic levels (for example, fish yield) generally=20 increases as rates of primary production increase. In open water marine = systems,=20 primary production is essentially equivalent to phytoplankton = production.=20 However, in freshwater and estuarine systems primary production is = carried out=20 by a diverse community that can include phytoplankton, macroalgae, = benthic=20 microalgae, submerged and emergent plants, and riparian vegetation. In = the=20 Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta (hereafter referred to as the delta), for = example,=20 there is a tremendous diversity of habitats and each is characterized by = different primary producers. In addition, organic matter, potentially = usable as=20 food by higher trophic levels, is delivered to the delta from the = surrounding=20 watershed through rivers. At present, however, there is not a clear=20 understanding of how production at higher trophic levels is supported in = the=20 diverse ecosystems that encompass the delta.
Our goal is to = identify those=20 primary producers that are most important in supporting production at = higher=20 trophic levels in the habitats encompassing the delta. As part of the = CALFED=20 supported study described above, Vicki Pilon (Ph.D. student) and I will = use=20 geochemical indicators (biomarkers) to identify the sources and quality = of=20 particulate organic matter (POM) in the water and sediments of the = different=20 environments characteristic of the delta. Lipid biomarker compounds and=20 naturally occurring stable isotopes will be used to identify the plant = types and=20 habitats that produce the most utilizable sources of suspended and = sedimentary=20 POM. In addition, we will use bulk biochemical measurements (total = lipid,=20 protein, and carbohydrate) to assess the potential usefulness of this = organic=20 matter as sources of energy and nutrition to organisms living in the = delta. This=20 article summarizes the approaches we are using as part of this work.
Chemical "signatures" = present in=20 environmental samples provide useful information about sources of = organic matter=20 important to freshwater, estuarine and marine ecosystems. This = information can=20 be present in elemental ratios, the presence of specific organic = compounds, and=20 the natural isotopic ratios of both biologically-important elements (C, = N, S)=20 and organic compounds. Collectively, these geochemical tools are termed=20 "biomarkers." Biomarkers have important characteristics: (1) their = source=20 specificity and (2) the predictable ways that compounds stabilize or = degrade=20 such that degradation products can be traced to specific source = organisms. In=20 general, the source specificity of a biomarker increases along a = continuum from=20 the bulk or elemental levels to molecular levels. For example, molar = ratios of=20 carbon to nitrogen (C:N) may provide insights regarding the relative = importance=20 of marine versus terrestrial sources of organic matter while specific = compounds=20 may allow one to differentiate between phytoplankton of diatom versus=20 dinoflagellate origins. However, it is important to note that as = biomarkers=20 become increasingly specific, they also represent a smaller fraction of = the=20 total organic matter.
Although no single = chemical tracer=20 can be used to characterize the composition of POM completely, molecular = biomarkers offer the following advantages over bulk chemical properties = such as=20 elemental and stable isotopic composition:
One additional = advantage is that=20 multiple potential sources can be assessed through the analysis of = single=20 compound classes. However, because information on the composition of = living=20 organisms is incomplete and can vary in response to environmental = conditions, it=20 is important to assess the composition of primary producers within the = system=20 being studied. While it may not be possible to extrapolate from = biomarker=20 compounds to quantitative assessments of source inputs, due to the = unknown=20 effects of degradation, molecular level tracers (particularly when used = in=20 conjunction with elemental and isotopic techniques) can identify sources = of=20 organic matter that would not otherwise be possible.
Recently, biomarkers = have been used=20 in studying the sources of organic matter associated with water column = particles=20 and surficial sediments in complex, estuarine and coastal systems. = Although=20 amino acids and simple carbohydrates can provide limited source = information,=20 lipids are the most useful biochemical class for identifying the origins = of POM.=20 Lipids provide better source characterization than other biochemicals = due to the=20 number of unique biosynthetic pathways organisms use to produce these = compounds,=20 as well as their relatively high geochemical stability. As part of this=20 interdisciplinary study supported through CALFED, we will use several = lipid=20 biomarker compounds to examine the origins and infer the reactivity of = POM in=20 suspended and surficial sediments. Two classes of lipid biomarker = compounds=20 (fatty acids and sterols) will be targeted. These compound classes were = selected=20 because they include compounds derived from organisms of likely = importance as=20 sources of organic matter to this system (for example, phytoplankton, = benthic=20 algae, terrestrial plants, and bacteria). Combining information derived = from=20 several independent indicators of the origins of organic matter has = proven to be=20 a reliable approach in addressing questions of organic matter source and = reactivity.
Naturally occurring, = stable isotopes=20 of carbon and nitrogen will be used to further evaluate the sources of = organic=20 matter. Stable carbon isotopes allow us to differentiate between = phytoplankton=20 and land plants because the sources of inorganic carbon used by each of = these=20 primary producers (dissolved HCO3- and atmospheric CO2) have different = isotopic=20 signatures. In addition, the ratio of 13C to 12C varies for different=20 photosynthetic pathways, allowing one to distinguish between organic = matter=20 produced by plants utilizing C3 (for example, needlerush; Juncus) versus = C4 (for=20 example, cordgrass; Spartina) pathways. Because the isotopic signatures = of=20 single elements (C, N) can have overlapping values in different groups = of=20 primary producers, we will use dual isotope analysis (in other words, C = and N)=20 to resolve potential source contributions. To aid in interpreting the = isotopic=20 signatures found for the seston and sediment samples collected as part = of our=20 study, we will also determine the isotopic signatures of various primary = producers that could be potential sources of the POM. An effort will be = made to=20 carefully examine isotopic variability in representative plant groups = over a=20 range of spatial and temporal scales.
Data obtained through = this study=20 will provide considerable insight into the sources and reactivity of = organic=20 materials produced within the delta. This information will tell us, for = example,=20 whether production is primarily supported by phytoplankton, terrigenous = or marsh=20 vascular plants, submerged aquatic vegetation (for example, Egeria), or = inputs=20 from the rivers draining into the delta. In recent years, we have used = lipid=20 biomarker compounds and naturally occurring stable isotopes to identify = the=20 composition of POM, particularly those sources that fuel heterotrophic = processes=20 in the San Francisco Bay Estuary (Canuel and others 1995; Canuel and = Cloern=20 1996). In this study, we will attempt to extend these findings to the = delta=20 region of San Francisco Bay thus providing additional information about = aquatic=20 food quality in this area of the bay, as well as a means of comparing = food=20 quality in the delta with other regions of this estuary. By identifying = what=20 habitats are most important in supporting productivity in the delta, our = findings can guide managers and policy makers in future restoration=20 efforts.
Canuel EA, JE Cloern, = DB=20 Ringelberg, JB Guckert, and GH Rau. 1995. Using molecular and isotopic = tracers=20 to examine sources of organic matter and its incorporation into the food = webs of=20 San Francisco Bay. Limnol. Oceanogr. 40:67-81.
Canuel EA, and JE = Cloern. 1996.=20 Regional differences in the origins of organic matter in the San = Francisco Bay=20 ecosystem: Evidence from lipid biomarkers. In: JT Hollibaugh, editor. = San=20 Francisco Bay: The Ecosystem. San Francisco, CA: Pacific Division of the = American Association for the Advancement of Science. p 305-24.
Randall Brown (Department = of Water=20 Resources), by way of Peter Moyle (UC Davis)
In a recent article, = Ricciardi=20 (1998) documented the global range expansion of an Asian mussel = (Limnoperna=20 fortunei). The mussel has already caused fouling problems in Hong Kong, = Korea,=20 Japan, Taiwan, and South America. Biologically, the Asian mussel is = quite=20 similar to the zebra mussel, but with a broader salinity tolerance. In = 1991 it=20 became established in Rio de la Plata Estuary in Argentina, probably by = ballast=20 water (Darrigran and Pasotorino 1995) and within two years up to 82,150 = mussels=20 per m2 were found in the littoral zone. Increasing shipping traffic = between Asia=20 and South America enhances the likelihood that the Asian mussel will = reach the=20 USA. This threat emphasizes the need for ballast water = control.
Ricciardi A. 1998. = Global range=20 expansion of the Asian mussel Limnoperna fortunei (Mytilidae): Another = fouling=20 threat to freshwater systems. Biofouling 13(2):97-106.
Darrigran G, and G = Pastorino. 1995.=20 The recent introduction of a freshwater Asiatic bivalve, Limnoperna = fortunei=20 (mytilidae) into South America. Veliger 38:171-75.
Dawn Friend, Department = of Water=20 Resources
DAYFLOW is a computer = program=20 developed in 1978 as an accounting tool for estimating historical = Sacramento-San=20 Joaquin Delta boundary hydrology. DAYFLOW output is used extensively in = studies=20 conducted by the Department of Water Resources (DWR), the Department of = Fish and=20 Game (DFG), by other State and federal agencies, and private = consultants.
The DAYFLOW program = presently=20 provides the best estimate of historical mean daily flows: (1) through = the Delta=20 Cross Channel and Georgiana Slough; (2) past Jersey Point; and (3) past = Chipps=20 Island to San Francisco Bay (net delta outflow). The degree of accuracy = of=20 DAYFLOW output is affected by the DAYFLOW computational scheme and the = accuracy=20 and limitations of the input data. The input data include the principal = delta=20 stream inflows, delta precipitation, delta exports, and delta gross = channel=20 depletions. These data include both monitored and estimated values as = described=20 in the DAYFLOW program documentation. Currently, flows are not routed to = account=20 for travel time through the delta. All calculations involving inflows,=20 depletions, transfers, exports, and outflow are performed using data for = the=20 same day.
DAYFLOW output data = are updated=20 every water year and are available from Water Year 1956 through Water = Year 1998.=20 The complete DAYFLOW program documentation, computational scheme, and = output are=20 available on the IEP website at http://iep.water.ca.gov/dayflow. To be = notified=20 by e-mail when updates are available, please contact Dawn Friend at=20 dfriend@water.ca.gov or (916) 227-7612.
Kimmerer (1997) = presented analyses=20 that suggest that the mortality and survival of young-of-the-year = striped bass=20 (Morone saxatilis) in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta is density = dependent. If=20 density-dependent mortality and survival are observable then = density-dependent=20 growth could also be observed in the same population.
To investigate this = issue I examined=20 the growth rates of young-of-the-year striped bass, between midsummer = and fall,=20 for density dependence. I also examined past and recent diets of=20 young-of-the-year striped bass caught in the Department of Fish and Game = (DFG)=20 Fall Midwater Trawl Survey (FMTS) to determine if diet changes have=20 occurred.
I calculated growth = rates for=20 young-of-the-year striped bass caught in the September, October, = November, and=20 December FMTS from 1969 to 1997 except for: November, 1969, September = and=20 December, 1976, (no FMTS conducted), 1974 and 1979 (no FMTS done for the = entire=20 year), 1983 (no young-of-the-year 38 mm index calculated), and 1995=20 (young-of-the-year 38 mm index was estimated but not measured). I used = the=20 following equation to calculate the growth rate for each month:
Growth rate (mm/day) = =3D [Average fork=20 length (in a given month) - 38 mm]/(Midday of survey - Date of 38 mm = townet=20 index)
I regressed the growth = rate on the=20 38 mm young-of-the-year index calculated from the DFG Midsummer Townet = Survey.=20 Density-dependent growth would be suggested if the slope parameter was = negative=20 and if the P value was less than or equal to 0.05. All four months were = analyzed=20 to determine if there was a particular time that growth rate became = density=20 dependent.
I analyzed diet data = on=20 young-of-the-year striped bass caught in the September, October, and = November=20 FMTS for the two periods 1968-1972 and 1996-1997. I summed these data by = month=20 for each time period and calculated the total number of bass sampled, = the=20 percentage of striped bass with food in the stomach, and the average = number of=20 major prey items per striped bass with food in the stomach.
The only statistically = significant=20 linear relationship was found between the November growth rate and the = 38 mm=20 young-of-the-year index (Figure 1):
Growth rate (mm/day) = =3D 0.526 -=20 0.001*(38 mm index) (standard error) (0.019) (0.0005) with r2 (adjusted) = =3D 0.22=20 and P =A3 0.0106 (with 23 degrees of freedom).
Figure 1 = Linear=20 relationship of growth rate and 38 mm Townet Survey Index of = young-of-the-year=20 striped bass (Morone saxatilis) caught in the September, October, = November, and=20 December midwater trawl. Calculated growth rates for the November FMTS = are=20 displayed as *.
A statistically = significant=20 quadratic relationship was found between the December growth rate and = the 38 mm=20 young-of-the-year index [R2 (adjusted) =3D 0.19, F =3D 3.795 with 2 and = 22 degrees=20 of freedom]. However, this relationship is not biologically realistic = and was=20 not considered further.
The diet analysis = revealed that=20 there has been a shift in young-of-the-year striped bass diet and that=20 young-of-the-year striped bass (in the size range caught by the FMTS) = are able=20 to utilize non-native prey species (Table 1). During the earlier period=20 (1968-1972) striped bass diet was primarily composed of the mysids, = Neomysis=20 spp., and amphipods, Corophium spp. and others. During the more recent = period=20 (1996-1997) the diet had shifted to other sources; mainly the introduced = mysids=20 Acanthomysis spp., and greatly towards the introduced amphipods Gammarus = spp.=20 with some contribution from Corophium spp. In the most recent period = Gammarus=20 decreased by an order of magnitude from October to November (see Table = 1).
Food consumption, as = indicated by=20 the percentage of bass with food in the stomach, did not vary greatly = between=20 time periods. It was higher during the earlier period for September and = October=20 but lower in November (see Table 1).
Meaningful density = dependent growth=20 of young-of-the-year striped bass is not evident from this study. The = growth=20 rate analysis for November is suggestive; however, the slope and r2 = values were=20 small. Hence, these results do not concur with Kimmerer (1997) findings = of=20 density-dependent mortality.
Density dependence = suggests a=20 carrying capacity is being exceeded. Competition for food is the most = likely=20 cause of density dependence; however, significant correlation between = food=20 resources and carrying capacity are not evident. Although Neomysis (a = staple=20 food for striped bass in the earlier period) has declined (Orsi and = Mecum 1996)=20 other food items have taken its place and the percentage of striped bass = with=20 food in the stomach is not much different between the two time periods = (see=20 Table 1). The effect these new food sources have had on carrying = capacity and=20 growth have yet to be determined.
This research was done = for the=20 IEP/COMPMECH Striped Bass Workshop held on 10 and 11 August 1998, in = Stockton,=20 California.
Kimmerer WJ. 1997. = Flow effects and=20 density dependence in striped bass. IEP Newsletter 10(4):11-15.
Orsi JJ, and WL = Mecum. 1996. Food=20 limitation as the probable cause of a long-term decline in the abundance = of=20 Neomysis mercedis, the opossum shrimp in the Sacramento-San Joaquin = Estuary. In:=20 JT Hollibaugh, editor. San Francisco Bay: The Ecosystem. San Francisco, = CA:=20 Pacific Division of the American Association for the Advancement of = Science. p.=20 375-401.
Aasen G, DA Sweetnam, = and LM Lynch.=20 Establishment of the wakasagi, Hypomesus nipponensis, in the = Sacramento-San=20 Joaquin Estuary. California Fish and Game 84:31-35.
Feyrer F, and R = Baxter. Fecundity=20 and egg size of splittail. California Fish and Game 84:119-126.
Gartz R, R Fujimura, = L Miller, and=20 P Smith. Measurement of larval striped bass, Morone saxatilis, net = avoidance=20 using evasion radius estimation to improve estimates of abundance and = mortality.=20 Accepted by the Journal of Plankton Research.
Orsi JJ, and S = Ohtsuka.=20 Introduction of the Asian copepods Acartiella sinensis, Tortanus = dextrilobatus=20 (Copepoda:Calanoida), and Limnoithona tetraspina (Copepoda:Cyclopoida) = to the=20 San Francisco Estuary, California, USA. Accepted by Plankton Biology and = Ecology.
Orsi J (Editor), R = Baxter, S=20 DeLeon, K Fleming, and K Hieb. Report on 1980-1995 fish, shrimp, and = crab=20 sampling in the San Francisco Estuary. IEP Technical Report 63 (Due for=20 publication in 1999).
Anna Holmes and Jennifer = Osmondson,=20 Department of Fish and Game
Since its discovery in = South San=20 Francisco Bay in 1992, the Chinese mitten crab population has increased=20 exponentially and its distribution has expanded rapidly in the San = Francisco=20 Estuary and Central Valley. To track the relative abundance of age-0 = mitten=20 crabs in the delta and Suisun Marsh, IEP initiated an annual juvenile = mitten=20 crab survey in summer 1997. This survey complements the adult crab = (age-1+) data=20 collected in fall by the USBR and DWR fish salvage facilities and the = IEP=20 fisheries monitoring program (for example, the Bay Study otter trawl = survey). In=20 fall 1998 we also conducted two small special studies for juvenile = mitten crabs:=20 a survey along the salinity gradient from Suisun Bay to the western = delta and a=20 survey of water hyacinth in the delta.
Our 1998 monitoring = survey included=20 four Suisun Marsh stations and 14 delta stations (Figure 1). Of the 14 = delta=20 stations, 10 are core and 4 are peripheral. Core stations were sampled = once in=20 July and once in August, four weeks apart, while peripheral stations = were=20 sampled once in August. Changes from 1997 included dropping the = peripheral=20 station at Middle River at Wing Levee Road and adding a peripheral = station at=20 Consumnes River Preserve in the northeast delta and at Mossdale Crossing = County=20 Park in the southeast delta. A core station was added in the western = delta at=20 Marsh Creek near Big Break and the Venice Island station was changed = from a=20 peripheral station in 1997 to a core station in 1998.
Stations were sampled = at a minus low=20 tide when a maximum area of bank is exposed. At each station all = burrows, root=20 tunnels, ponded water, overhanging vegetation, debris, and driftwood = were=20 searched for mitten crabs from the high tide mark to the water line = along a 5 m=20 transect. Physical parameters measured were the same as for the 1997 = survey=20 (Veldhuizen 1997).
Figure 1 = Juvenile mitten=20 crab monitoring stations in Suisun Marsh and the delta, summer 1998
As in 1997, mitten crab = densities were=20 higher in Suisun Marsh than the delta. In Suisun Marsh, mean density = (average of=20 both surveys) was highest at Suisun Slough and lowest at Denverton = Slough (Table=20 1). From the first to the second survey, densities increased at Hill = Slough,=20 Suisun Slough, and Montezuma Slough, and decreased at Denverton Slough. = The=20 highest sample density (not a mean) was 3.33 crabs/m2 at Suisun Slough = in=20 August. Mean size was 11.2 mm carapace width (cw) for the first survey = (n=3D20)=20 and 17.6 mm cw for the second survey (n=3D23).
In the delta, crabs = were found at=20 only three stations in 1998: Venice Island, Cliffhouse, and Sherman = Island (see=20 Table 1). Mean density was highest at Sherman Island, followed by Venice = Island=20 and Cliffhouse. From the first to the second survey, densities increased = at=20 Cliff House and Venice Island and decreased at Sherman Island. The = highest=20 sample density was 0.90 crabs/m2 at Sherman Island in July. Mean size of = age-0=20 crabs was 13.0 mm cw for first survey (n=3D3), and 18.4 mm cw for the = second=20 survey (n=3D8). During the first survey, we found five age-1 mitten = crabs at the=20 Sherman Island station ranging from 31 to 36 mm cw.
Comparison of data = between 1997 and=20 1998 shows a decrease in abundance at three of our four Suisun Marsh = stations=20 (see Table 1). Densities decreased at the Hill Slough, Montezuma Slough, = and=20 Denverton Slough stations with the greatest decrease at Denverton = Slough. There=20 was a large increase in density from 1997 to 1998 at the Suisun Slough = station.=20 The salinity in the marsh was substantially lower this year, as it = ranged from=20 0.34 to 1.27 in 1998 compared to 4.4 to 7.2 in 1997.
In the delta, crabs = were found at=20 two of the same stations, Cliffhouse and Sherman Island, in 1997 and = 1998.=20 Density increased at Sherman Island from 1997 to 1998 and decreased = slightly at=20 Cliffhouse (see Table 1). Although mitten crabs were also found at the = Venice=20 Island station in 1998, in 1997 they were found further south at the = Middle=20 River and Tracy Oasis Marina stations.
A special study was = conducted in=20 fall 1998 along the salinity gradient from Ryer Island in Suisun Bay to = Sherman=20 Island to determine if mitten crab densities west of the delta differed = from=20 densities in the delta. We sampled three days within two weeks in late = October=20 and early November. Traveling west to east, four sites were sampled each = day,=20 but the sites sampled each day varied with weather conditions and time=20 constraints with low tide. Chipps, Browns, and west Sherman islands were = sampled=20 all three days while Ryer, Snag, and east Sherman islands were sampled = only one=20 day. The site at east Sherman Island coincides with our Sherman Island = station=20 from our land-based monitoring survey. With the exception of shortening = the=20 transect length to 3 m and the use of a small boat to access the sites, = sampling=20 methods were identical to our land-based monitoring survey.
From our salinity = gradient survey,=20 we found that the average density of juvenile mitten crabs was higher = west of=20 the delta than in the delta. Average density of crabs was 4.52 crabs/m2 = at=20 Chipps Island, 1.03 crabs/m2 at Browns Island, 2.86 crabs/m2 at west = Sherman=20 Island, and 1.67 crabs/m2 at east Sherman Island. Salinity ranged from = 3.86 at=20 Ryer Island to 0.10 at east Sherman Island. In general, size increased = as we=20 traveled eastward: average size was 22.3 mm cw at Chipps Island = (n=3D19), 27.1 mm=20 cw at west Sherman Island (n=3D16), and 29.0 mm cw at east Sherman = Island=20 (n=3D3).
We also conducted a = special study=20 for juvenile mitten crabs in water hyacinth in October 1998. Small crabs = have=20 been reported in beds of aquatic plants in the delta, including water = hyacinth=20 and the Brazilian water weed, Egeria densa. We believe vegetation may = offer=20 protection from predators and desiccation and could be an important = habitat for=20 juvenile mitten crabs in the delta. A 1 m2 dip net was constructed from = PVC pipe=20 and 0.3 mm mesh netting. We sampled Browns Island, west Sherman Island,=20 Mandeville Island, and Holland Tract. At each station, three samples = were taken=20 and we searched the roots, stems, and leaves for crabs. Although no = mitten crabs=20 were collected, we did find many other species residing in or directly=20 underneath the plants. Crayfish were common and ranged from = approximately 2 to=20 50 mm in length. We also collected mosquitofish, juvenile largemouth = bass and=20 bluegill, dragonfly larvae, arachnids, amphipods, and one frog.
Two studies of = juvenile mitten crabs=20 in the delta are planned for 1999. Tanya Veldhuizen of DWR will = investigate=20 habitat use by juvenile mitten crabs at several delta locations. She = plans to=20 compare mitten crab densities along bank, littoral, and channel = habitats. The=20 distribution study will be complemented by a survey for juvenile crabs = in=20 different vegetation types, such as water hyacinth, submerged aquatic = vegetation=20 (for example, Egeria densa, Potamogeton spp., and Myriophyllum spp.), = and=20 emergent vegetation. Brian Blease, a San Francisco State graduate = student, has=20 proposed to study mitten crab densities and burrowing along a = longitudinal=20 gradient from Suisun Bay through the delta in spring and summer = 1999.
We would like to thank = Kathy Hieb of=20 DFG and Tanya Veldhuizen of DWR for the opportunity to collaborate on = the=20 continuation of this monitoring study as well as guidance on sampling = methods=20 and new site recommendations, DFG personnel who provided valuable advice = on=20 locations of potential monitoring sites, and Paul Raquel, Don Bright, = Rich=20 Reiner of The Nature Conservancy, Tracy Oasis Marina, and Windmill Cove = for=20 access to their property. This work is part of the Mitten Crab Studies = program=20 element, funded and supported by the Interagency Ecological = Program.
Veldhuizen T. 1997. = First annual=20 IEP monitoring survey of the Chinese mitten crab in the delta and Suisun = Marsh.=20 IEP Newsletter 10(4):21-22.
Randall Brown, Department = of Water=20 Resources
In December, Dr. Perry = Herrgesell=20 stepped down as chair of the IEP Coordinators. He has been promoted to = Chief,=20 Central Valley Bay-Delta Branch. Alan Baracco is the new chair.
Perry has been at the = Bay-Delta=20 Branch since 1979. He created and led the Delta Outflow/San Francisco = Bay Study=20 before assuming the role of Study Manager in 1990. With Pete Chadwick's=20 retirement in 1993, Perry began his coordinator assignment.
Hopefully, Perry will = continue some=20 level of IEP involvement. As part of his responsibilities as Alan's = supervisor,=20 he may have to step in and urge the coordinators to stop the endless = chitchat=20 and make a decision. We also need an occasional reminder to read the red = book (a=20 1993 review of the IEP) in those rare instances when the coordinators = appear to=20 be drifting and unclear of where the IEP is heading. We all wish Perry = good luck=20 in his new position and thank him for 20 years of direct involvement in = the=20 Bay-Delta Program.
On 28 October 1999 the = IEP Directors=20 approved the 1999 IEP Program and associated budget. The 1999 Program = has over=20 65 separate monitoring and special study elements covering a broad = spectrum of=20 physical and biological subjects. The 1999 Program has an estimated cost = of=20 $14.1 million. Table 1 highlights the agencies contributing to the = program and=20 the agencies that are doing the work.
The 1999 Program is = the result of a=20 ten-month process that included the participation of principal = investigators,=20 project work teams (PWTs), the Management Team, the Coordinators, the = Management=20 Level Advisory Group (MLAG) and the Directors. The program development = started=20 with the Management Team revising the Long-term Planning Considerations=20 document. This document defined in a broad sense what work the IEP = should=20 undertake. The Management Team sent this document to all of the PWTs, = which, in=20 turn, shared it with potential principal investigators. Based on these = long-term=20 planning considerations and a knowledge of what work needed to be done,=20 principal investigators prepared pre-proposals and submitted them to the = PWTs=20 for review and consideration. The PWTs assembled all of the = pre-proposals and=20 sent them, along with recommendations on priority, to the Management = Team. The=20 Management Team compiled and reviewed the recommendations of the PWTs = and, based=20 on program budget considerations, long-term planning considerations, and = perceived program information priorities, developed an integrated, = overall=20 conceptual program. The Coordinators reviewed the conceptual program and = directed the Management Team to make revisions to the proposal based on = the=20 responsiveness of the program to agency information needs, priorities, = and=20 budgets. This conceptual program was reviewed by the MLAG for their = input and=20 recommendations, after which it was revised and finalized by the = Coordinators.=20 The Coordinators presented this conceptual program to the Directors and = with=20 their approval it became the 1999 IEP Program.
Several general themes = are=20 emphasized in the 1999 IEP Program. All program elements that produce = data will=20 submit their data for storage on the IEP server within six months of = collection.=20 All products identified in the pre-proposals will be specified by the = type of=20 scientific paper to be produced and a date by which a draft will be = submitted=20 for review. All program elements will have an assigned review team = consisting of=20 at least two individuals who may be from the PWT, IEP, or outside the = IEP. These=20 review teams will be responsible for the first level of review of all = products=20 produced by each program element. All field activities for the delta = smelt=20 shallow water studies, delta smelt and wakasagi identification research, = and=20 fall Kodiak trawl have been stopped to allow biologists sufficient time = to=20 complete their analysis and reports. Field activities on the Suisun Bay=20 hydrodynamics data collection and analyses efforts will be limited to = allow for=20 the timely production of reports.
As in past years, the = proposed=20 program is comprised of a mixture of "monitoring" and "special study"=20 activities. Special studies consist of new programs and on going, = multi-year=20 programs. Changes in program elements fall into three categories: (1) a=20 continued emphasis on shallow water investigations; (2) expanded = investigations=20 into exotic species; and (3) renewed emphasis of fish facilities work.=20 Considerable effort has been directed towards investigations for the=20 understanding of shallow water habitat in the delta. These efforts = include the=20 following: development of baseline larval fish samples to judge the = status of=20 any restoration efforts on Prospect Island; contributing to and = participating in=20 the University of Washington flooded island investigations; shallow = water marsh=20 sampling program; the funding of a new land-margin larval fish sampling = program;=20 and the completion of the shallow water fisheries data analysis element. = All of=20 these efforts will provide valuable information on what shallow water = habitat=20 is, how it is used, by whom and when. The Chinese mitten crab and green = crab=20 investigations were re-focused to drop the monitoring aspect and = concentrate on=20 defining the habitat relationships of the Chinese mitten crab. A new = gelatinous=20 zooplankton, jellyfish, investigation was added this year in response to = the=20 appearance of recently introduced hydromedusa from the Black Sea and = other=20 locations. All of the information gathered by these efforts will be = critical for=20 the design and monitoring of CALFED restoration efforts.
The IEP Fish = Facilities Program was=20 revised by establishing a parallel group to the Management Team and = PWTs. This=20 team, the Fish Facilities Coordination and Review Team, will oversee all = of the=20 fish facilities related work and will report to the Coordinators. Fish=20 facilities work with UC Davis on the development of fish screens and = screen=20 criteria continues. New fish facilities work includes "Evaluation of the = effects=20 of collection and transport on the acute survival of delta smelt and = splittail=20 from the State Water Project," "Evaluation of telemetry methods for = tracking=20 juvenile salmon," "Adult salmon tracking study in the San Joaquin = River," and=20 "Developing a methodology to accurately simulate the entrainment of fish = by=20 agricultural diversions." CALFED Category III grants will fund $400,000 = of the=20 last two programs.
In 1998, IEP has = provided=20 considerable personnel resources towards the CALFED CMARP process and = this=20 commitment will be extended into 1999 as Stage I nears implementation. = The IEP=20 Coordinators and Management Team view this as a high priority.
As IEP elements = involve multiple=20 agencies, the infrastructure that supports them must also be integrated. = One=20 major part of this infrastructure is the research vessels used. Several = of these=20 vessels are over 30 years old and can no longer be used in adverse = conditions,=20 while other boats are no longer safe to use under any circumstances. An = IEP=20 Research Vessel Replacement Plan has been approved by the Coordinators = and=20 Directors and is being implemented. This plan details what actions = should be=20 taken for each IEP vessel and when they should occur. This will allow = the=20 Management Team and Coordinators to know in advance what the annual = funding=20 needs are for vessel replacement and major repairs. This plan covers the = period=20 from 1998 to 2012 and will be updated every two years.
One problem with = drawing field staff=20 from multiple agencies is to insure everyone is knowledgeable of field=20 procedures and safety protocols. To address this need, the IEP has = adopted a=20 policy that states, "All permanent boat operators will complete the = Department=20 of Interior boat operator safety certification course and all other = individuals=20 who operate IEP boats will pass a boat operator evaluation given by a = permanent=20 boat operator using a standardized procedure." The IEP field operations = have an=20 excellent safety record and the field staff work hard at maintaining=20 it.
There have been = changes in the=20 membership of the Management Team and Coordinators in 1998. Pat = Coulston, the=20 IEP Program Manager transferred to a position with DFG Region 3 in = Monterey and=20 Chuck Armor (DFG) was chosen to serve as IEP Program Manager. Mark = Pierce=20 (USFWS) and Dale Sweetnam (DFG) have joined the Management Team and = Kevin=20 Urquhart (DFG) has left. Among the Coordinators, Victoria Whitney has = replaced=20 Jerry Johns as the State Water Resources Control Board representative = and Alan=20 Baracco has replaced Perry Herrgesell as the chair of the Coordinators = and the=20 DFG representative.
Three new PWTs were = added in 1998,=20 one for shallow water investigations, chaired by Mike Chotkowski, and = one for=20 mitten crab work, chaired initially by Zachary Hymanson, and a parent=20 hydrodynamics team, chaired by Pete Smith. If you have an interest in = working on=20 either of these teams, please contact the chair.
Jane Rogers, Program = Executive, The San=20 Francisco Foundation, 225 Bush Street, Suite 500, San Francisco, = California=20 94104-4224 (http://www.sff.org)
The San Francisco = Foundation=20 announced the call for proposals for 1999 Switzer Environmental = Leadership=20 Grants. The Robert and Patricia Switzer Foundation established its = Environmental=20 Leadership Grant Program in 1990 to serve three goals: (1) to contribute = to=20 environmental problem solving; (2) to encourage emerging environmental = leaders=20 to do public interest work; and (3) to help nonprofit and government = agencies to=20 secure the services of highly trained professionals, particularly = scientist.
The Switzer Directory = is now on the=20 web at www.switzernetwork.org. It contains a complete listing and = description of=20 interests of all 273 Switzer Fellows. If there is a match between the = work of=20 your organization on an environmental issue and the skills and interests = of a=20 Switzer Fellow, we encourage you to apply to the Switzer Environmental=20 Leadership Grant Program. It is important to know that Switzer = Environmental=20 Leadership Grants are only awarded to organizations working with a = Switzer=20 Fellow. Projects are expected to reflect the active participation and = commitment=20 of a current Switzer Fellow or Switzer Fellowship alum. Therefore, the = Switzer=20 Fellow's involvement should be secured before the proposal is submitted = and,=20 ideally, before the project is fully designed.
We will accept = one-year proposals=20 for up to $25,000 and multi-year proposals for up to $50,000. = Organizations with=20 annual budgets of more than $5 million will be eligible for one-year = grants=20 only. We expect a grants budget of approximately $165,000 for 1999. In = the past,=20 some successful proposals for Switzer Environmental Leadership Grants = have=20 originated with Switzer Fellows. Other projects have been conceived by = leaders=20 of eligible organizations who subsequently recruited Switzer Fellows to = work=20 with them.
Please contact Jane = Rogers, Program=20 Executive, or Sondra Wuthnow, Program Assistant, at (415) 733-8500 to = request=20 the following information or if you have any questions:
Grant applications = will be accepted=20 once in 1999, postmarked by Friday, February 19, 1999. Please send six = copies of=20 the complete proposal and attachments. Notification of awards is = expected by=20 mid-May 1999.
Richard N. Oltmann, David = H.=20 Schoellhamer, and Randal L. Dinehart, US Geological Survey
An article in the = spring 1996 IEP=20 Newsletter presented data on suspended-sediment loads entering the=20 Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, California, from the Sacramento and San = Joaquin=20 rivers for water years 1960-1995. This article updates that article with = suspended-sediment data for water years 1996 and 1997.
The US Geological = Survey (USGS)=20 recently began monitoring suspended and bedload sediment transport in = the delta.=20 The objective of the study is to describe the movement of sediment and = its=20 availability for habitat restoration. This article presents information = about=20 bedload movement in the delta from this new study and also presents=20 suspended-sediment inflow to San Francisco Bay from the delta for 1994 = through=20 1996.
The USGS routinely = measures the=20 daily suspended-sediment load entering the delta with the flows of the=20 Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers. Most of the suspended sediment that = flows=20 into the delta is carried by these two rivers, but some sediment also = enters=20 from the Yolo Bypass, the Mokelumne, Calaveras, and Cosumnes rivers, as = well as=20 from several smaller streams. This article presents the = suspended-sediment data=20 for the Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers collected during the 1996 and = 1997=20 water years [USGS California District Office, Automated Data Processing = System=20 (ADAPS)] and compares it to statistically analyzed data from the = long-term=20 record.
Daily = suspended-sediment records are=20 nearly continuous since Water Year 1960. The Sacramento River data have = been=20 collected at two locations: for water years 1960-1979 at Sacramento and = for=20 Water Year 1980 to the present at Freeport. The San Joaquin River data = have been=20 collected at Vernalis. The data are suspended- sediment loads only and = do not=20 include sediment moving along the channel bottom as bedload. The time = series of=20 daily-mean suspended-sediment load from these two 38-year-long records = were=20 reduced to monthly and yearly values for this article. The only gaps in = the data=20 occur during February 1966 for the Sacramento River, and during April = and June=20 1966 and Water Year 1969 for the San Joaquin River. Suspended-sediment = data are=20 shown in units of tons per month or tons per water year.
Figure 1 shows the = maximum, minimum,=20 median, and mean monthly suspended-sediment loads for both rivers for = 1960-1995=20 (ADAPS).
Also included on = Figure 1 are the=20 monthly loads for both rivers for 1996 and 1997. Note that the = mean-monthly=20 sediment loads are about one order of magnitude greater for the = Sacramento River=20 than for the San Joaquin River.
The monthly = suspended-sediment loads=20 for January through May 1996 for the Sacramento River (Figure 1A) were=20 considerably above the 1960-1995 long-term mean, and the March through = May loads=20 were close to the maximum-monthly loads for the period of record. During = Water=20 Year 1997, only the December and January loads were significantly above = the=20 long-term mean; the January load was slightly less than the historical = maximum=20 monthly load (January 1978). The January 1997 flows were extremely high = and were=20 immediately followed by an unusual drought condition. The March through = June=20 loads were well below the long-term means.
The San Joaquin River = monthly=20 suspended-sediment load pattern was similar to that of the Sacramento = River with=20 the February through May 1996 monthly loads considerably above the = long-term=20 mean (Figure 1B). The February load was slightly less then the = historical=20 maximum monthly load (February 1983). During Water Year 1997, the = December load=20 was slightly less than the 1964 historical maximum December load, and = the=20 February monthly load was slightly less than the 1983 historical maximum = February load. The January 1997 load resulted in the highest monthly = load ever=20 recorded at the Vernalis site. (March 1983 was the previous maximum = monthly=20 load.) It exceeded the previous January maximum monthly load (1980) by = nearly=20 50%. The April through September loads were below the long-term means; = drought=20 conditions existed during this period.
Figure=20 1 Monthly suspended-sediment load statistics for 1960-95 compared = with 1996=20 and 1997 monthly suspended-sediment loads for the (A) Sacramento and (B) = San=20 Joaquin rivers, California
Figure=20 2 shows the ratio of the yearly (water year) suspended sediment load = (in=20 tons) to yearly river flow (in acre-feet) for the period of record for = both=20 rivers. The average yearly ratios are nearly equal at 0.12 = tons/acre-foot for=20 the Sacramento River (Figure 2A) and 0.11 tons/acre-foot for the San = Joaquin=20 River (Figure 2B). The Sacramento River plot indicates a slight downward = trend=20 with time; however, the high-flow years of 1996-1997 deviate from that = trend.=20 The flow also was high for the San Joaquin River; however, the = sediment-flow=20 ratios are not elevated as they are for the Sacramento River.
Figure 2 = Annual ratios=20 of suspended sediment-load and river flow for the (A) Sacramento and (B) = San=20 Joaquin rivers, California
During summer 1998, = the USGS=20 established a network of five sites in the delta where suspended-solids=20 concentration (SSC) is monitored. Optical backscatter sensors are = deployed at=20 each site to collect measurements at fifteen-minute intervals (Buchanan = and=20 Schoellhamer 1998). Water samples are collected periodically and = analyzed for=20 SSC. The results of these analyses are used to calibrate the sensors. = Sensors=20 have been installed on the Sacramento River at Freeport and Rio Vista, = San=20 Joaquin River at Stockton and Jersey Point, and Threemile Slough. The = USGS is=20 presently monitoring flow at each of these sites.
Acquisition of bedform = profiles in=20 the delta has provided much qualitative information about bedload = movement and=20 some preliminary bedload rates. Bedload is the movement of sediment = (usually=20 sand in the delta) along the bottom of waterways which creates bedforms = such as=20 dunes. Bedload rates can be estimated from bedform movement. Bedform = profiles=20 are recorded by a boat equipped with high-accuracy digital sonar = cruising along=20 pre-planned grid lines. Using a Global Positioning System receiver, the = grid=20 lines are followed on a map of the measuring site and the position and=20 corresponding depth are recorded every second.
Bedform profiles = collected on the=20 Sacramento River in October 1997 and March and July 1998 show contrasts = in=20 bedform heights and lengths. The change in bed elevation for that period = averaged three feet or less, even in reaches that showed bar topography = of ten=20 feet or more in height. Sand is transported through these reaches over = long bar=20 forms that may be stable even at the highest flows.
Surveys during storm = flows are=20 planned to assess their stability.
Bedform monitoring in = the Sacramento=20 River near Garcia Bend has shown that in July 1998 bedform transport was = measurable at a flow rate of 20,000 cubic feet per second.
In Threemile Slough, = bedforms longer=20 than 300 feet with crest heights of ten feet or more were measured = several times=20 in March and June 1998. The bedforms have steep fronts facing the San = Joaquin=20 River, indicating dominant transport from the Sacramento River to the = south. The=20 overall profile of the reach shows increasing bed elevation near the = southern=20 end of the slough at the San Joaquin River. Tidal action in the slough = also=20 causes minor effects on bedform profiles, including the formation of = symmetrical=20 bedforms in parts of the channel affected more by northerly currents. = The=20 largest bedforms with steep fronts facing south also acquire minor, = superposed=20 bedforms with steep fronts facing north.
Figure=20 3 Bedform profile of Threemile Slough, California. The southern = endpoint is=20 near the San Joaquin River and the profile proceeds north toward the = Sacramento=20 River.
In the San Joaquin = River (Figure 4),=20 bedform profiles around the meander east of Threemile Slough document = the=20 complexity of sediment transport through this junction. Bedforms wash = out at the=20 deepest part of the channel, while large sand waves migrate west farther = up on=20 the point bar. Nearest the shallow side of the channel, smaller bedforms = migrate=20 east. Sequences of bedform profiles have been planned to determine the = pathways=20 of bedload delivered to the San Joaquin River from Threemile Slough.
Figure=20 4 Bedform profile of San Joaquin River east of Threemile Slough,=20 California
The USGS established a = network of=20 eight sites in San Francisco Bay where SSC is monitored (Buchanan and=20 Schoellhamer 1998). A site at Mallard Island has been in operation since = February 1994. The time series of SSC three feet below the water surface = from=20 February 1994 to September 1996 is shown in Figure 5B. Gaps in the data = are=20 caused by sensor fouling and malfunction and power outages, often caused = by=20 vandals. At this scale, tidal variations in SSC appear as a fuzzy black = band. To=20 better observe trends in the data at time scales greater than the tidal = time=20 scale, a running median SSC (Schoellhamer 1997) is shown in Figure 5C. A = 30-hour=20 averaging window was chosen to remove most of the diurnal and = semidiurnal tidal=20 variation, producing a residual time series of SSC. Ideally, a numerical = filter=20 to remove the tides would be applied to the data (Schoellhamer 1996), = but data=20 gaps make this difficult. If the majority of data is invalid in each = 30-hour=20 window, then the median is not computed.
Delta discharge (DWR = 1986) (Figure=20 5A) during winter 1994 was low compared to other winters and SSC showed = no=20 obvious effect of discharge. During nonwinter months, delta discharge = typically=20 is much less than during the winter and has no discernible effect on = SSC. The=20 maximum SSC during the period of record was concurrent with large delta=20 discharge in January and March 1995. The first large runoff of winter = creates=20 the greatest SSC at Mallard Island because this "first flush" transports = erodible sediments from the Central Valley watershed into the bay and = leaves=20 less erodible sediment for future storms (Goodwin and Denton 1991). = Excellent=20 examples of the effect of the first flush occurred in 1995 and 1996, = which may=20 have been missed in 1994. Sediment transport from the delta to the bay = is=20 relatively large during the first flush because discharge and SSC are = large at=20 that time. Small SSC occurred a few weeks after the SSC maxima in 1995 = and 1996,=20 following releases of water with low turbidity from reservoirs. Stronger = winds=20 during summer increase residual SSC due to increased wind-wave = resuspension in=20 shallow water and transport by currents (Krone 1979). The spring/neap = cycle=20 accounts for variation of residual SSC with a fourteen-day period. = Seasonal wind=20 and spring/neap effects on SSC also have been observed in South San = Francisco=20 Bay (Schoellhamer 1996).
Figure=20 5 (A) Estimated delta discharge, (B) 15-minute suspended-sediment=20 concentration, and (C) residual suspended-sediment concentration at = Mallard=20 Island, California
Support for collection = of SSC time=20 series at Mallard Island has been provided by the Interagency Ecological = Program, San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board, USGS = Federal/State=20 Cooperative Program, San Francisco Bay INATURES Program, and Toxic = Substances=20 Hydrology Program. Support for the study of sedimentation in the delta = is=20 provided by CALFED.
Buchanan PA, and DH = Schoellhamer.=20 1998. Summary of suspended-solids concentration data, San Francisco Bay, = California, Water Year 1996. US Geological Survey Open-File Report = 98-175. 59=20 p.
California Department = of Water=20 Resources. 1986. DAYFLOW Program documentation and DAYFLOW data summary = user's=20 guide.
Goodwin P, and RA = Denton. 1991.=20 Seasonal influences on the sediment transport characteristics of the = Sacramento=20 River. In: Proceedings of the Institute of Civil Engineers, part 2, = volume 91,=20 p. 163-172.
Krone RB. 1979. = Sedimentation in=20 the San Francisco Bay system. In: TJ Conomos, editor. San Francisco Bay: = The=20 Urbanized Estuary. San Francisco, CA: Pacific Division of the American=20 Association for the Advancement of Science. p. 85-96.
Schoellhamer DH. = 1996. Factors=20 affecting suspended-solids concentrations in South San Francisco Bay,=20 California. Journal of Geophysical Research 101(C5):12087-95.
Schoellhamer DH. = 1997. Time series=20 of suspended-solids concentration, salinity, temperature, and total = mercury=20 concentration in San Francisco Bay during Water Year 1996: 1996 Annual = Report of=20 the Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances. p. 65-77.
Kenneth Nichols, US Fish = and Wildlife=20 Service, CA-NV Fish Health Center
The overall health of = all fish=20 examined appeared good. Infectious Hematopoietic Necrosis Virus, and = evidence of=20 low hepatic glycogen reserves were detected in asymptomatic Feather = River=20 Hatchery fish. Light infections of Renibacterium salmoninarum were found = in=20 asymptomatic Merced River Fish Facility fish.
Fall-run chinook = salmon from the=20 Merced River Fish Facility (MRFF) and Feather River Hatchery (FRH) were = sampled=20 at Mossdale Boat Ramp on the San Joaquin River on 17 and 24 April 1998,=20 respectively [river kilometer (rkm) 5]. These fish were cohorts of = marked=20 chinook released from this site 24 hours earlier. Fish were removed from = the=20 live box in groups of 10, euthanized in MS222, measured for length, = weighed, and=20 rated for external features. They were then bled and rated for internal=20 features. Also at this time, pathogen samples were collected.
Chinook salmon were = captured by=20 midwater trawl on the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta near Chipps Island = (rkm 29)=20 by the Sacramento-San Joaquin Estuary Fishery Resource Office. = Thirty-three=20 adipose clipped chinook were sampled in nine tows. Data and samples were = collected using the methods mentioned for Mossdale. The scale would not = operate=20 properly aboard the boat so weights were not taken. Blood data from the = Chipps=20 Island trawl samples are suspect due to an equipment problem which = postponed=20 centrifugation up to four hours.
Two condition factors=20 (K=3D[Wt/L3]*105) were calculated for each fish based on fork length = (KFL) and=20 total length (KTL). Fish were scored on quantity of visceral fat and=20 abnormalities of the skin, eye, and gill (Table 1). Hematocrit and = leukocrit=20 measurements were performed and blood plasma was frozen. Blood plasma = was latter=20 analyzed for glucose and/or total protein levels. Glucose stress = response was=20 measured for MRFF and FRH fish at Mossdale by holding the fish out of = the water=20 in a net for 30 seconds, returning them to the water, and collecting = blood 30=20 minutes later (Barton and others 1986). Blood was also collected from = four FRH=20 fish at 50 minutes after stress. Percent lipid was measured by = extracting lipid=20 from a frozen carcass and expressed as percent of wet weight (Free and = Foott=20 1998). Statistical analysis between release groups was performed using = Student's=20 t-test (Glantz 1992).
Organosomatic and = blood data are=20 summarized in Table 2. Examination of FRH and MRFF at Mossdale indicated = no skin=20 (no scale loss) or gill abnormalities. Five percent of FRH fish (1 fish) = had an=20 unidentified abnormality in the eye. Based on silvering, both groups = appeared to=20 be undergoing smoltification. MRFF fish were larger than FRH fish = (P<0.05),=20 and condition factors were not significantly different (KTL: P=3D0.09; = KFL:=20 P=3D0.08). No significant health problems were seen by histological = examination in=20 either group. While the kidney parasite PKX was seen in MRFF fish in = 1996 (True=20 1996) no parasites were seen this year or in the 1997 release fish = (Foott=20 1997).
Of the 33 fish = captured at Chipps=20 Island, coded-wire tag (CWT) data showed 14 fish (42.4%) were from the = MRFF, ten=20 fish (30.3%) were from the Mokelumne River Hatchery, five fish (15.2%) = were from=20 the Coleman National Fish Hatchery, three fish (9.1%) were from the FRH, = and one=20 fish (3.0%) was of unknown origin (lost CWT). All organosomatic scores = were=20 normal for these fish, except for scale loss consistent with the sample = method.=20 Three of 14 MRFF fish were from the April 16 Mossdale release group. = None of the=20 three FRH fish were from April 23 Mossdale release. Due to the small = number of=20 recaptured fish, we did not compare pre- and post-release = groups.
While hematocrit, = leukocrit, and=20 plasma total protein scores were statistically greater (P<0.05) in = the MRFF=20 fish than the FRH group at Mossdale, both groups were within normal = ranges=20 (Wedemeyer and Chatterton 1971). The tendency toward higher hematocrit = scores in=20 MRFF fish was also seen in 1996 (True 1996) and 1997 (Foott 1997).=20 Unfortunately, blood data are not available from the Chipps Island = trawl, so=20 these groups could not be compared after release.
Plasma glucose levels = from stressed=20 fish, measured 30 minutes after stress, showed nine of nine Mossdale = MRFF and=20 two of five Mossdale FRH fish with a normal glucose response (90 mg/dL 1=20 ). None of the four Mossdale FRH fish sampled 50 minutes after stress=20 demonstrated a normal glucose response. Poor glucose stress response = suggests=20 low hepatic glycogen, and histological review of Mossdale FRH fish also=20 indicated low glycogen reserves in the liver. Both groups sampled at = Mossdale=20 received similar treatment, and therefore, observed differences were = most likely=20 due to conditions during the twenty-four-hour holding period on site, = during=20 transport, or during rearing conditions at the hatchery. Visceral fat = was lower=20 in Mossdale FRH fish (P<0.05), yet percent lipid was not = significantly=20 different (P=3D0.12). Low visceral fat in 1996 FRH stocks did not = correspond to=20 poor glucose stress response (True 1996) and may not be related to low = glycogen=20 stores.
Infectious Necrosis = Hematopoietic=20 Virus (IHNV) was detected in three of five kidney samples (5 fish pools) = from=20 asymptomatic Mossdale FRH fish. No virus was found in six samples (5 = fish pools)=20 from Mossdale MRFF, nor in 11 samples (3 fish pools) from Chipps Island. = IHNV=20 was reported at FRH prior to release (Dr. Bill Wingfield 1998, pers. = comm.).
No significant = bacterial fish=20 pathogens were found in cultures of kidney samples. Direct Fluorescent = Antibody=20 Test (DFAT) of kidney samples for Renibacterium salmonirarum found 2 of = 30=20 asymptomatic Mossdale MRFF fish with light infections, and no R. = salmoninarum in=20 25 Mossdale FRH fish. DFAT of fish captured at Chipps Island found 2 of = 30 fish=20 with infections of R. salmonirarum. One of these R. salmoninarum = positive fish=20 could be identified by CWT as originating from MRFF. The other infected = fish is=20 most likely from a MRFF CWT group, but this cannot be = confirmed.
Barton BA, CB = Schreck, and LA=20 Sigismondi. 1986. Multiple acute disturbances evoke cumulative = physiological=20 stress response in juvenile chinook salmon. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc.=20 115:245-251.
Foott JS. 1997. = Health assessment=20 of Feather River Hatchery (FRH) and Merced River Fish Facility (MRFF) = juvenile=20 chinook held for 48 hours at the Dos Reis Ramp, May 1 1997. Anderson, = CA: US=20 Fish and Wildlife Service.
Free DL, and JS = Foott. 1998. Health=20 and Physiology of Broodyear 1996 Coleman National Fish Hatchery Fall = Chinook=20 (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha). Anderson, CA: US Fish and Wildlife = Service.
Glantz SA. 1992. = Primer of=20 Biostatistics. New York: Mcgraw-Hill. 440 p.
True K. 1996. Health = Monitoring=20 Component of South Delta Salmon Study-Spring 1996. Anderson, CA: US Fish = and=20 Wildlife Service.
Wedemeyer G, and K = Chatterton.=20 1971. Some blood chemistry values for the juvenile coho salmon = (Oncorhynchus=20 kisutch). J. Fish Res. Bd. Can. 28(4):606-8.
The endangered salt = marsh harvest=20 mouse (Reithrodontomys raviventris halicoetes) (SMHM) inhabits the diked = and=20 tidal wetlands of the Suisun Marsh. Water projects of the Department of = Water=20 Resources (DWR) and the US Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) have impacted=20 populations of the mouse in the marsh, and mitigation efforts include = the=20 establishment of seven set-aside areas and monitoring of mouse = populations. The=20 seven set-aside areas plus the Peytonia Slough Ecological Reserve were = set with=20 live traps in 1998 to determine if the mouse was present at these eight = areas=20 (Figure 1).
The SMHM is endemic to = tidal marshes=20 of the San Francisco Bay Estuary. Optimal habitat for the SMHM is = described as=20 100% cover about 30 cm high, consisting primarily of pickleweed = (Salicornia sp.)=20 (USFWS 1984). Approximately 80% of the historical tidal marsh in the = estuary has=20 been lost to diking, fill, and development (SFEP 1998). As a result of = this loss=20 of habitat and declining populations, the SMHM was listed as an = endangered=20 species by the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in 1970 and the = Department=20 of Fish and Game (DFG) in 1971.
Figure 1 = Department of=20 Fish and Game lands set aside as Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse habitat and = Peytonia=20 Slough Ecological Reserve
There are two = subspecies of the=20 SMHM; R. r. raviventris occurs in the southern part of the estuary = around San=20 Francisco Bay, and R. r. halicoetes is found in the northern estuary = around San=20 Pablo and Suisun bays. The work discussed in this article was conducted = in=20 Suisun Marsh on R. r. halicoetes.
R. r. halicoetes is a = small reddish=20 brown mouse with a grayish white belly, large eyes and a long tail. The = SMHM=20 feeds on green vegetation and seeds, and can drink water ranging from = brackish=20 to sea water. They do not burrow, but will construct ball-like nests of = dry=20 plant matter on the ground or in vegetation. They swim calmly and well, = an=20 important characteristic for a small mammal native to an environment = that is=20 frequently inundated. The SMHM is usually docile when handled, so much = so that=20 behavior is used as a secondary characteristic in identifying them to = species=20 (Fisler 1965).
The water projects of = DWR and USBR=20 have caused changes to the amount and timing of delta outflow, which has = impacted salinity in Suisun Marsh channels. To mitigate those impacts, = the Plan=20 of Protection for the Suisun Marsh (DWR 1984) and the Suisun Marsh = Preservation=20 Agreement (SMPA) (USBR and others 1987) outlined plans for physical = facilities,=20 a monitoring program, and implementation of management plans and a = cost-share=20 program for marsh landowners. There were concerns that these actions = would have=20 a negative impact on endangered species such as the SMHM. The USFWS = Biological=20 Opinion for the Plan of Protection required several actions to protect = SMHM=20 populations in the marsh, including:
These actions were to = be funded by=20 DWR and USBR, and completed by DFG in consultation with USFWS.
In 1987, DFG set aside = as SMHM=20 habitat 1,063 acres on seven parcels of State land (see Figure 1). Five = of the=20 areas are diked wetlands; Joice Island and Hill Slough East are tidal = wetlands.=20 These seven set-aside areas were to be trapped every three years to = assess=20 whether SMHM were present on the areas. Baseline trapping was conducted = in 1987=20 but the set aside areas were not surveyed again until 1996.
In 1995 the = signatories to the SMPA=20 began negotiating Amendment Three to the agreement. This amendment would = expand=20 activities within the managed wetlands. The USFWS is concerned that the = expanded=20 management activities may adversely affect the SMHM, and that past = mitigation=20 and monitoring requirements should be met before implementing additional = actions=20 with potentially adverse impacts to SMHM. In response to these comments, = efforts=20 are currently underway to come into full compliance with permit = requirements for=20 SMHM mitigation and monitoring in the Suisun Marsh, and an interagency = team, the=20 SMPA Environmental Coordination Advisory Team (ECAT), has been formed to = assure=20 that permit requirements are met. As part of this effort, the seven = set-aside=20 areas plus the Peytonia Slough Ecological Reserve (see Figure 1) were = surveyed=20 during August and September 1998, by DFG and DWR staff.
The goal of trapping = in 1998 was to=20 determine whether SMHM were present at the areas surveyed. One-hundred = Sherman=20 live-traps were set for three consecutive nights at each area. The traps = are 3"=20 3.5" 9.25" aluminum boxes that close when a rodent enters and activates = a=20 pressure-sensitive treadle. Tail/body ratio, tail characteristics, and = behavior=20 were used to identify harvest mice (Reithrodontomys sp.) to the species = level=20 (Shellhammer 1984). SMHM were hair-clipped so that recapture rates could = be=20 assessed. All trapped rodents were released at the capture = site.
SMHM were captured at = all areas=20 surveyed except at the two tidal set-aside areas, Joice Island and Hill = Slough=20 East. Trapping results are shown in Table 1.
Large areas of Suisun = Marsh were=20 flooded in early 1998 when exterior levees along Suisun Bay breached in = several=20 places. Pond 1, which usually is drained by the end of February, was = flooded=20 until May, and Crescent Unit was flooded until April, about six to eight = weeks=20 longer than usual. Other set-aside areas were not directly impacted by = the=20 flooding, although precipitation and high tides may have increased water = depths=20 or duration of flooding.
The prolonged flooding = appeared to=20 have affected rodent populations at both Pond 1 and Crescent Unit. In = previous=20 trapping efforts at Pond 1, either SMHM, western harvest mice, and house = mice,=20 or house mice only were captured. Nine SMHM and one house mouse were = captured in=20 1998; it appears that SMHM survived the flooding at Pond 1 where western = harvest=20 mice and house mice did not. At Crescent Unit, recent trapping efforts = have=20 consistently captured SMHM (up to 14%). Western harvest mice, house = mice, and=20 voles have also been captured at this site. In 1998, only SMHM were = captured,=20 with trap success at less than 2%. It appears that prolonged flooding = depressed=20 the numbers of all rodent species and SMHM have begun to repopulate this = area.
Although no SMHM were = captured at=20 the tidal areas at Hill Slough East and Joice Island, trap success was = good at a=20 third tidal area, Peytonia Slough. The most notable difference between = these=20 areas is patch size. The area trapped at Peytonia Slough was fairly = large, about=20 50 x 120 m. The patch sizes were small at Joice (35 x 50 m and 20 x 100 = m) and=20 narrow at Hill Slough (about 24 m wide), and it is possible that the = mice are=20 either absent, at very low densities due to habitat size or quality, or = are also=20 using other habitat types within the tidal areas, and are widely = dispersed=20 through the pickleweed areas trapped. Perhaps the last few years of high = precipitation and runoff have favored the occurrence of less salt = tolerant=20 vegetation to the detriment of halophytes like pickleweed, and that = drier=20 conditions are needed to provide habitats of adequate size for the SMHM = in tidal=20 areas.
Trap success was = highest at Benicia=20 Industrial Unit. This area has been trapped several times over the = years, but=20 until 1997, trapping efforts usually resulted in no SMHM. This area was = trapped=20 twice in 1997; in June, one SMHM was captured in 492 trap nights, but in = August,=20 18 were captured in 798 trap nights. SMHM may have moved into the area = when=20 adjacent areas were flooded by a broken tide gate. In addition to the 18 = captured on-site in 1997, 28 SMHM were released at Benicia in 1997. = These mice=20 had been trapped at the Morrow Island Distribution System, about three = miles=20 north of the Benicia site. In 1997 the MIDS was dredged and SMHM trapped = in the=20 area designated for dredge spoils were released at the Benicia = site.
The current survey = protocol for the=20 SMHM was written by DFG and approved by ECAT, and includes three years = of=20 presence/absence surveys at the set-aside areas plus other State and = private=20 lands to be determined by DFG and the Suisun Resource Conservation = District. The=20 1998 trapping was the first of these surveys. The second phase of the = survey=20 protocol will include mark-recapture trapping in sub-optimal habitat = types, such=20 as levee banks, upland grasslands, and wetland vegetation dominated by = species=20 other than pickleweed. This trapping effort will attempt to determine = which=20 habitats are used as refugia, SMHM use of sub-optimal habitats, and = population=20 levels of selected populations.
California Department = of Water=20 Resources. 1984. Plan of Protection for the Suisun Marsh Including = Environmental=20 Impact Report. 176 p. plus appendices.
Fisler GF. 1965. =
Adaptations and=20
speciation in harvest mice of the marshes of San Francisco Bay. Univ. =
California=20
Publ. Zool.
77:1-108.
San Francisco = Ecosystem Project.=20 1998. San Francisco Estuary Baylands Ecosystem Goals, Draft Report for = Public=20 Review. Prepared by the San Francisco Bay Area Wetlands Ecosystem Goals = Project.=20 26 June 1998. 124 p. plus appendices.
Shellhammer HS. 1984. = Identification of salt marsh harvest mice, Reithrodontomys raviventris, = in the=20 field and with cranial characteristics. Calif. Fish and Game Bull.=20 70(2):113-120.
US Bureau of = Reclamation,=20 California Department of Water Resources, California Department of Fish = and=20 Game, and Suisun Resource Conservation District. 1987. Suisun Marsh = Preservation=20 Agreement. 2 March 1987.
US Fish and Wildlife = Service. 1984.=20 Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse and California Clapper Rail Recovery Plan. = Portland,=20 OR: US Fish and Wildlife Service. 141 p.
Larry R. Brown (US Bureau = of=20 Reclamation) and Rick Sitts (Metropolitan Water District)
This is a summary of = the third delta=20 smelt workshop, held on 1 and 2 October 1998. A more complete summary = (which=20 includes a ranking of potential resource topics) can be obtained by = contacting=20 the authors. The purpose of the first day, held in Sacramento, was = primarily to=20 present new information collected since the previous May 1996 workshop. = The=20 purpose of the second day, held in Stockton, was to update the research = strategy=20 developed in 1996 and to provide a prioritized list of ongoing and = potential=20 studies.
On 1 October, = researchers presented=20 11 major technical presentations on delta smelt topics ranging from diet = and=20 growth to the status of culturing efforts. In addition to the technical=20 presentations, there was a panel discussion at the end of the day, = giving the=20 audience an opportunity to question the presenters. Abstracts of nine of = the=20 presentations are available on the IEP web page=20 (http://iep.water.ca.gov/resfisht/). A bibliography of 102 articles, = which=20 provide information on delta smelt is also available at the same = address.
Following are some = major points from=20 the presentations.
Dale Sweetnam (DFG) = provided a=20 context for the workshop based on prior and ongoing research, and the = need to=20 develop a clear picture of delta smelt habitat needs. Optimal habitat = remains=20 unclear and we have only weak statistical relationships of fall = abundance with=20 X2 and with January flow in the Yolo Bypass. Some of the unique aspects = of delta=20 smelt as indicated by research to date include the following:
Jenni Lott (DFG) and = Matt Nobriga=20 (DWR) presented data that support the idea that prey availability = affects the=20 abundance of delta smelt. They made the following points:
Lenny Grimaldo's (DWR) = presentation=20 of otolith microstructural data for summer 1996 indicated that delta = smelt grew=20 as they moved downstream. Delta smelt from Suisun Bay were larger than=20 individuals collected near the confluence and lower Sacramento and San = Joaquin=20 rivers because they were older. On average, delta smelt from Suisun Bay = were 11=20 days older than individuals found in the lower rivers. Lenny suggested = several=20 factors including food, salinity, and temperature may cue the downstream = movement of delta smelt.
Responses to audience = questions=20 about how diet changed downstream were that diet diversity appears to = increase=20 downstream and Pseudodiaptomus and mysids increase in the diet. Thus, = there=20 appears to be enough prey to support considerable numbers of young delta = smelt=20 on their way downstream, at least in years like 1996.
Geir Aasen (DFG) = pointed out that=20 shallow water habitat data are limited and our understanding of the = importance=20 of shallow water habitat is poor because most sampling occurs in = mid-channel and=20 shallow habitat sampling is difficult. He went on to present 1997 data = testing=20 an experimental plankton net design and examining differences in delta = smelt=20 abundance in shallow (less than 3 m) versus shore habitat. Results = indicate that=20 larval delta smelt are surface oriented and are not found in = significantly=20 greater numbers in shore areas. The absence of juveniles in shallow = bottom=20 samples suggests that juveniles that have better developed air bladders = are more=20 buoyant and consequently are even more surface oriented than larvae.
Among other questions, = participants=20 asked, "What next?" Responses included expanded sampling to compare = shallow and=20 shore areas to mid-channel water columns. Also, future analyses could = include=20 examination of the recent data on other species collected during = 1997.
Laboratory data = presented by=20 Paciencia Young (UCD) indicated that delta smelt are poor, slow, = unsteady=20 swimmers. Many fish (42%) were unable to swim adequately in swimming = performance=20 test chambers. The endurance of able fish exceeded six hours at water = velocities=20 of 5 and 10 cm/s, about one hour at 15 to 25 cm/s, and only about ten = minutes=20 above 30 cm/s. The 5 and 10 cm/s velocities equate to 0.16 and 0.33 = ft/s.=20 Swimming performance was worse in the dark at night than during the day. = Maybe=20 they "rest" at night in the wild and are less susceptible to = predation.
Some participants = speculated that=20 delta smelt may move slowly in bay-delta waters to avoid detection by = predators.=20 Perhaps in support of this speculation, Bill Bennett commented later in = the=20 workshop that delta smelt are rare in stomach contents of its predators. = Thus,=20 the "poor swimmer" phrase may be misleading and the paradigm should = relate to=20 predator avoidance, in other words, perhaps they swim "well" for this = purpose.=20 If so, other factors that enhance detection of still or slow fish, such = as=20 increased water clarity, may be detrimental.
Several questions for = Paciencia and=20 other swimming performance researchers related to the mortality and = other=20 effects of keeping fish in the lab for ten days prior to testing. The = holding=20 process represented the best technique at the time and is improving. = Also, these=20 researchers cautioned others about the hazards of extrapolating from the = lab to=20 the field. Unfortunately, we are in a situation where we only have = laboratory=20 data to apply to field problems. For example, much of the swimming = performance=20 research is being used to determine criteria for screening = diversions.
Joe Cech (UCD) = provided data on=20 delta smelt environmental tolerance in his presentation. Upper = temperature=20 tolerance limits for delta smelt acclimated to 21 =B0C were 28 and 29 = =B0C, in fresh=20 water and brackish (4 ppt salinity) water, respectively. Minimum = temperature=20 tolerance limits for fish acclimated to 12 and 21 =B0C in fresh water = were 6 and 7=20 =B0C, respectively. The chronic salinity tolerances of = freshwater-acclimated delta=20 smelt exposed to 2 ppt half-day steps ranged up to 19 ppt. As with the = swimming=20 trials, there were challenges in keeping delta smelt alive after capture = in the=20 field. Adding salt to the holding water seemed to increase survival.
Addressing another = aspect of=20 survival (the interaction of fish screening and swimming performance), = Christina=20 Swanson (UCD) presented data on delta smelt swimming behavior and = performance in=20 multivector flows similar to those that occur near screened water = diversions. In=20 all approach velocity combinations tested, except the control (0 cm/s), = delta=20 smelt experienced frequent contact with the screen. In most combinations = including velocities >6 cm/s (0.2 ft/s), some were impinged for some = period=20 of time or died while on the screen.
A contact velocity = near 0 cm/s=20 increases the challenge to imaginatively develop effective measures to = minimize=20 delta smelt impingement and entrainment losses. One might pursue = research on=20 measures to reduce such losses, and study intakes deep and below=20 surface-oriented delta smelt, if they really are surface-oriented.
Bill Bennett (UCD) = described how=20 predacious exotic inland silversides may affect delta smelt. Silversides = may=20 consume delta smelt larvae and compete for resources with juvenile and = adult=20 delta smelt. These interactions can occur in shallow backwater areas = inhabited=20 by both species, such as backwaters of the Cache Slough area.
Bill commented on the = management=20 implications of trying to separate delta smelt and silversides. Evidence = indicates the potential benefit of maintaining adequate freshwater = outflow and a=20 suitable X2 position, to transport young delta smelt away (for example,=20 downstream) from habitats co-occupied by silversides (for example, the = Cache=20 Slough area). However, Bill also made the point that outflow and certain = restoration actions to benefit delta smelt may conflict. For example, he = considered the restoration of shallow backwater habitats for delta smelt = spawning, noting how little we understand spawning requirements. Should = such=20 restoration inadvertently and disproportionately benefit co-occurring = inland=20 silversides, then greater silverside abundance would mean greater = predation on=20 larval delta smelt.
Joan Lindberg (UCD) = described=20 progress on incubating eggs and rearing larvae, and on supplying delta = smelt to=20 various research projects. Small-scale larval feeding experiments = indicate that=20 at least three to four million algae cells per milliliter produce an = initial=20 feeding response in delta smelt larvae (in other words, the "green water = effect"). Cultured delta smelt eggs and larvae supported an aquatic = herbicide=20 toxicity study and studies of growth rates and tissue and genetic = conditions.=20 She also reported that spawning occurs as water temperature approaches = 14 to 15=20 =B0C, typically from early April to mid-June.
According to Tara = Smith (DWR), one=20 can study the positioning of delta smelt in the delta with the Particle = Tracking=20 Model (DSM2-PTM). The model simulates the transport and fate of = individual=20 "particles" traveling throughout the delta. The model takes = one-dimensional=20 hydrodynamic values, and by utilizing velocity profiles and mixing = creates a=20 three-dimensional environment for the particles to move. One can = evaluate=20 effects on particle movement of different inflows, exports, diversions, = and=20 structural changes, such as barriers.
The current particle = tracking model=20 permits the addition of characteristics or behaviors so that particle = movement=20 more closely mimics the behavior of a species, such as delta smelt. The = model is=20 ready to run for delta smelt pending input from other studies on = behavioral=20 characteristics. In response to questions about DSM2-PTM availability, = Tara said=20 the model is available and can be downloaded from=20 http://wwwdelmod.water.ca.gov/. A training course is available if more = than 20=20 students enroll.
Bill Bennett (UCD) = discussed two key=20 problems related to understanding the ecology of delta smelt: (1) = teasing out=20 concurrent multiple effects and (2) understanding how population = regulation=20 works. He described a population model for delta smelt and the role of=20 monitoring and science. Among suggested research topics were the = following:
The risk spreading = discussion=20 included the concept of linked subpopulations. The idea is to protect=20 subpopulations in a few, well-chosen locations during catastrophic = events. (The=20 DSM2-PTM could be very useful in examining risk spreading.)
The audience debated = the use of=20 population abundance estimates in assessing fish salvage numbers. There = was some=20 support for the idea that a population abundance estimate would allow = some=20 quantitative perspective on the meaning of salvage levels. However, = others=20 suggested that it is too difficult to reliably estimate delta smelt = abundance.=20 Interpretation of delta smelt salvage levels in terms of population = effects=20 remained unresolved.
Dale Sweetnam = mentioned we just=20 missed meeting the 5-year recovery criteria for delta smelt as one year = fell=20 short. Under the current criteria, a new clock started in 1998.
This recent proximity = to recovery=20 and the growth in new knowledge led some to discuss revisiting the Delta = Smelt=20 Recovery Plan. Experts drafted the plan in 1992, when much less = information=20 existed about delta smelt. The USFWS published the plan in 1995, with = only=20 modest revision. Further, there was speculation that if delta food web=20 productivity for fish has indeed declined, then present recovery = criteria may be=20 unachievable.
A panel of the = speakers and the=20 audience focused primarily on research needs. Research ideas or lessons = learned=20 regarding field biology, facilities, or modeling included the = following:
On the second day, the = group focused=20 on revising the 1996 Research Agenda (available at=20 http://iep.water.ca.gov/resfisht). The process included reviewing = progress since=20 1996, reviewing ongoing and proposed research, and finally, = re-evaluating and=20 re-prioritizing the research agenda. The day culminated a draft research = agenda=20 for ranking by workshop attendees and resident fish PWT members.
Some of the habitat = research on the=20 1996 list is underway while some remains unfunded. Shallow water habitat = is=20 being addressed with staff assigned to do analysis next year instead of=20 fieldwork. The otoliths analysis and downstream movement work is = complete.=20 Spawning habitat identification remains undone, as it has not been a = high=20 priority. Limited efforts have not resulted in the collection of any = delta smelt=20 eggs.
Behavioral studies = related to=20 distribution, movement, and swimming performance have progressed. = However, lack=20 of staff hinders progress. Horizontal and vertical distribution studies = during=20 the day or night remain undone because staff are Particle Tracking Model = (PTM)=20 is ready for trial application to delta smelt movement. However, the = model needs=20 field data (from other tasks) to calibrate the PTM to properly reflect = the=20 behavior of delta smelt larvae. Treadmill studies are underway for = another=20 season.
Horizontal and = vertical distribution=20 data would aid in understanding where delta smelt go in Suisun Bay, = identifying=20 migration corridors, and understanding how they use shallow areas. To = solve the=20 lack of staff and secure timely data, how about contracting for data = collection?=20 One could contract on a long-term routine basis to meet IEP and = contractor=20 needs. This provides the data rather than delaying important information = and=20 understanding needed by decision makers, managers, and other = scientists.
Completed population = studies on the=20 1996 agenda include diet studies and bioassays on mercury and Komeen, an = aquatic=20 herbicide. Although there is interest in competition, predation, toxics, = and=20 other studies, proposals on some items were not prepared or not funded. = In a few=20 cases, such as agricultural diversion effects, results were still out on = the=20 proposals.
Ongoing studies = include the=20 following:
We also reviewed the = status of=20 proposals or anticipated proposals, which included the following:
Obviously, being on = the long-term=20 research agenda does not guarantee funding, although it may = help.
The workshop = communicated a=20 considerable amount of new information on delta smelt. We see progress = on topics=20 with important implications for delta smelt survival including food=20 availability, inland silverside predation, tolerable water temperature = and=20 salinity, and swimming performance. However, we still need more = information on=20 distribution of delta smelt in different habitat types. Additional data = are=20 needed for the particle tracking model. Understanding of delta smelt = growth has=20 increased. Data confirmed that delta smelt grow as they move downstream; = however, other data indicated difficulty in switching prey and reduced = adult=20 size. Lastly, we remain uninformed about spawning requirements, while = facing the=20 potential loss of the delta smelt culture operations.
Research continues and = the new=20 agenda is in preparation. The new list stems from several data-rich=20 presentations and discussions among a group of informed scientists. = These=20 discussions focused on studies to improve our knowledge to support = recovery and=20 maintenance of delta smelt.
Lenny Grimaldo and = Zachary Hymanson,=20 California Department of Water Resources
The Brazilian = Waterweed Egeria=20 densa, native to South America, is a submerged macrophyte that has = successfully=20 invaded shallow water habitats in the central and south delta. The = impact of=20 this invasive pest on the delta ecosystem is not understood, however,=20 preliminary data collected from shallow water habitat fish = investigations during=20 the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Wetland Breach (BREACH) study show = Egeria densa=20 can substantially alter the surrounding physical and biological = environment. In=20 this article we present a brief life history of the plant, provide some=20 preliminary data, and discuss the potential impact to habitats invaded = by=20 Egeria.
Egeria densa is a = dioecious,=20 freshwater perennial with adventitious roots. It usually dominates still = water=20 environments through vigorous growth, resulting in homogenization of the = environment (Cook and Urmi-Konig 1984; Getsinger and Dillon 1984). = Consistent=20 with the other areas invaded by Egeria, we found it was the dominant = submergent=20 vegetation type in shallow water areas of the central delta. = Proliferation of=20 Egeria in this estuary is most likely aided by the increase in water = clarity=20 over the last 25 years (DWR 1996). Increased light penetration into the = water=20 column increases photosynthesis and promotes faster growth rates = (Haramoto and=20 Ikusima 1988; Cook and others 1984). We observed dense stands of Egeria = growing=20 in water depths up to 3.5 meters in many areas of the central delta.
Water clarity was also = higher in the=20 Egeria stands compared to nearby shallow water areas without vegetation. = In=20 Franks Tract (not a routine BREACH study site) we observed secchi depths = over 2=20 m in a dense stand of Egeria during the first week in September (Figure = 1).=20 Normally a turbid area because of wind fetch and boat wakes, this = measurement is=20 very high for Franks Tract (Figure 2). We attribute higher water clarity = to=20 sedimentation of suspended particles by reduced water movement in the = Egeria=20 densa. (Lars Anderson 1999, pers. comm.). How sedimentation rates and = subsequent=20 marsh formation will be affected by Egerias' dense colonization is = unknown. It=20 is likely Egeria will change the rate at which these ecological = processes occur=20 (Denise Reed 1998, pers. comm.).
Figure 1 A = dense mat of=20 Egeria densa in Franks Tract, September 1998. The secchi depth was over = 2=20 meters.
Figure 2 = Mean Annual=20 Secchi Depth in Franks Tract 1973-1995. * 1998 data point represents one = measurement taken in September during BREACH study. No monitoring data = was=20 collected during 1996-1998.
Egeria can also affect = water=20 temperature and dissolved oxygen. In areas covered by expansive Egeria = stands,=20 the upper few inches of the mats will absorb heat from the sun during = the day=20 and block heat loss during the night (Lars Anderson 1999. pers. comm.). = Low=20 dissolved oxygen could also occur in dense mats at night and during = early=20 morning hours when respiration by the plant is high. These changes in = the=20 physical environment could potentially effect diel distribution of local = biota.
Preliminary biological = data from the=20 BREACH study show that introduced fish species and Chinese mitten crabs = were=20 most abundant in Egeria densa stands compared to other submerged = macrophyte=20 habitat types and open water. In contrast, native fish were far less = frequent=20 inhabitants of the Egeria. The exact mechanism as to why fewer native = fish were=20 found in the Egeria compared to the introduced fish is unknown. Although = this=20 relationship could simply reflect differential habitat selection, we = hypothesize=20 competition or predation pressures from introduced fish will limit = native fish=20 use in shallow water habitats invaded by Egeria.
The local impacts of = Egeria on the=20 delta ecosystem are substantial. What is not known is how local and = possibly=20 intense changes in the abiotic and biotic environment will affect = ecological=20 processes on a larger scale. Also of concern is the potential for Egeria = to=20 invade and alter newly created or restored shallow water habitats in = delta. We=20 think further research is warranted. A task force of managers and = researchers=20 led by the Department of Boating and Waterways is currently = investigating=20 potential eradication treatments and associated impacts of Egeria = removal in the=20 delta (Mike Trouchon 1998, pers.comm.). Lars Anderson (United States = Department=20 of Agriculture), will initiate Egeria densa phenology and life history = studies=20 in 1999. Biological and physical monitoring will continue during the = BREACH=20 study until June 1999. As we learn more about Egeria, we anticipate that = we will=20 begin to answer many of the currently pressing questions and, in the = process,=20 ask new ones.
California Department = of Water=20 Resources. 1996. Water Quality Conditions in the Sacramento-San Joaquin = Delta=20 1970-1993. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Water Resources.
Cook CDK, and K Urmi = Konig. 1984. A=20 revision of the genus Egeria (Hydrocharitacea). Aquatic Botany = 19:73-96.
Getsinger KD, and CR = Dillon. 1984.=20 Quiescence, growth and senesence of Egeria densa in Lake Marion. Aquatic = Botany=20 20:329-38.
Haramota T, and I = Ikusima. 1988.=20 Life cycle of Egeria densa Planch., an aquatic plant naturalized in = Japan.=20 Aquatic Botany 30:389-403.
Obreski S, T Irwin, = and J Pearson.=20 1998. Effects of Control Methods on the Egeria densa Community. Report = to the=20 Department of Boating and Waterways.
Anderson L. Telephone = conversation.=20 January 1999.
Trouchon M. In-person = conversation.=20 January 1999.
Reed D. In-person = conversation.=20 December 1998.
Paciencia S. Young, = Christina Swanson,=20 Turid Reid, and Joseph J. Cech, Jr., University of California, Davis
Approximately 2,240 = water diversions=20 are located throughout the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, and entrainment = and=20 impingement of fish eggs, larvae, and juveniles at these diversions are=20 considered major factors contributing to the decline of many delta fish. = We=20 studied individual swimming performance of two native (delta smelt and=20 splittail) and two introduced (inland silversides and wakasagi) delta = fish to=20 determine their comparative vulnerability to entrainment and impingement = near=20 water diversion structures. Delta smelt (Hypomesus transpacificus) is a = small=20 estuarine osmerid that is listed as a threatened species under both the = federal=20 and State endangered species acts. Splittail (Pogonichthys = macrolepidotus) is a=20 cyprinid that was proposed for listing as a threatened species under the = Endangered Species Act by the US Fish and Wildlife Service. Inland = silversides=20 (Menidia beryllina), a small atherinid native to the eastern United = States, made=20 their way to the delta after being introduced illegally into Clear Lake, = California. Inland silversides and delta smelt are similar in size, = morphology,=20 and eating habits, making them potential competitors. Because = silversides are=20 voracious larval predators, hatching larval delta smelt may be extremely = vulnerable to schools of foraging silversides (Bennett 1995). Wakasagi=20 (Hypomesus nipponensis), another small osmerid, was originally = introduced from=20 Japan into six warm water reservoirs in California, and is suspected to = be a=20 threat to the survival of the endemic delta smelt because of its = potential=20 habitat encroachment. The wakasagi and delta smelt are morphologically = so=20 similar that they are difficult to visually tell apart. F1 hybrids = between delta=20 and wakasagi smelts have been found (May 1996), although hybridization = between=20 the two does not appear to be a management concern at this time (Stanley = and=20 others 1995).
Individual swimming = performance was=20 measured using a modified Brett-type recirculating swimming flume = incorporating=20 a pump with a calibrated variable speed motor. The upstream and = downstream=20 screens of the swimming chamber (9 cm diameter, 25 cm long) were = polyethylene=20 with 3 4 mm mesh size. All fish were acclimated at 17 =B0C for at least = seven days=20 before an experiment, and none of the fish were used more than once. = Swimming=20 performance was measured during the day between 0800 to 1700 Hours at = 50-60 lux=20 light intensity. Swimming performance was measured in terms of critical = swimming=20 velocity (Ucrit), the maximum velocity a fish can maintain for a = specified=20 period of time. The end point of the experiment was fatigue; in other = words,=20 three impingements on the downstream screen of the swimming flume. Some = fish=20 swam to the front of the chamber and attached themselves to the screen = that=20 defined the front of the chamber by biting with their jaws. Biting on = the front=20 screen enabled the fish to "catch a free ride", maintaining their = position in=20 the chamber without swimming. In instances where the fish bit on the = front=20 screen, the timer was turned off to exclude biting time from swimming = time. An=20 experiment was terminated when a fish bit for >120 s or swim time = between=20 bites was <20 s.
Three to six fish per = species were=20 over-anesthetized in MS-222, fixed in 95% alcohol, and placed in 1% = aqueous=20 potassium hydroxide to dissolve the tissue, stained with alizarin red S, = and=20 stored in glycerin in preparation for skeletal examination. This was = done for=20 jaw examination to investigate the biting behavior of some = fishes.
Some of the results on = delta smelt=20 and splittail in this study have been published in our previous papers = (Young=20 and Cech 1996; Swanson and others 1998). Results from this study showed = that=20 Ucrit increased with size in all species (P<0.001) except in delta = smelt=20 (Figure 1). Splittail regression slope (7.16) was higher than = silversides and=20 wakasagi slopes (3.43 and 3.82, respectively) indicating greater = increase in=20 splittail Ucrit as fish size increased. To facilitate comparison of = swimming=20 performance among different species, Ucrit of each species were sorted = according=20 to size classes of 1 cm standard length intervals (Figure 2). For the = class=20 sizes 2.1 to 3.0, and 3.1 to 4.0 cm standard length (SL) no significant=20 differences in Ucrit were observed among the different species. However, = for=20 delta smelt, mean Ucrit in size classes > 4 cm SL was significantly = lower=20 than those of wakasagi; in size classes > 5 cm SL, significantly = lower than=20 those of splittail; and in size classes > 6 cm SL, significantly = lower than=20 those of silversides. Silversides mean Ucrit was also significantly = lower than=20 those of splittail in size classes > 6 cm SL.
Delta smelt and inland = silversides=20 were observed to nip on the upstream screen but were unable to hold on = for 2 s=20 or more. Generally, at high velocities (including velocities near Ucrit) = some=20 splittail and wakasagi were observed to burst forward and orally = attached=20 themselves to the upstream screen with their jaws. Examination of the = jaw=20 morphology in 4 to 5 cm SL fish showed that delta smelt and wakasagi = have tiny,=20 pointed teeth on the upper and lower jaws; silversides have longer = pointed teeth=20 on the upper and lower jaws; while splittail have no teeth present in = the jaws.=20 This demonstrates that presence of teeth in the jaws does not indicate = potential=20 screen-biting behavior.
The lack of a = significant size=20 effect on delta smelt swimming performance may suggest that juvenile, = subadult=20 and adult delta smelt have equal vulnerability to entrainment and = impingement=20 near water diversions. At size <5 cm SL, all four species have = comparable=20 swimming performance. However, at size >5 cm, young-of-the-year = splittail,=20 silversides, and wakasagi are capable of higher levels of swimming = performance=20 and possibly less vulnerable to entrainment and impingement than delta=20 smelt.
Some young-of-the-year = splittail and=20 wakasagi were observed to bite the upstream screen of the flume at high = water=20 velocities. Young-of-the-year splittail screen-biting activity was first = reported in our previous study (Young and Cech 1996). Screen-biting = obviated=20 swimming-related body undulations, presumably decreasing the energy = requirements=20 while avoiding impingement on the downstream screen. Oral attachment to=20 vegetation or other structures at high water velocities may represent = adaptive=20 behavior by minimizing displacement and decreasing energy requirements. = This=20 adaptive behavior may give splittail and wakasagi an advantage over = delta smelt=20 and silversides in maintaining position near water diversion = structures.
Figure 1 = Critical=20 swimming velocity of different species at different standard lengths
Figure 2 = Mean critical=20 swimming velocity (SEM) of different species at different size classes=20 (asignificantly < wakasagi; bsignificantly < splittail and = wakasagi;=20 csignificantly < other species; dsignificantly < = splittail)
We acknowledge = financial support=20 from the California Department of Water Resources, facilitated by R. = Brown, D.=20 Hayes, T. Frink and S. Mayr. The delta smelt collection was made = possible with=20 assistance from the California Department of Fish and Game, through the=20 cooperation of D. Sweetnam, G. Aaasen, J. Lott, K. Urquhart, R. = Fujimura, P.=20 Macias, R. Soto, D. Killam, G. Edwards and the bay-delta boat crew. We = thank M.=20 Danley, M. Lee, C. Meloni, D, Shigematsu, S. Cummings, C. Porter, J. = Schmidt, T.=20 Mussen, C. Meloni, J. Murray, J. Hsu, S. Katzman, for technical = assistance. We=20 are indebted to D. Hinton and R. Cole for guidance and assistance in = skeletal=20 preparation. We are grateful to P. Lutes and W. Bentley of the UCD = Aquaculture=20 and Fisheries Program for their facility-related assistance.
Bennett WA. 1995. = Potential effects=20 of exotic inland silversides on delta smelt. IEP Newsletter Winter. p = 4-6.
May B. 1996. = Identification of=20 smelt and their interspecific hybrids in the Sacramento-San Joaquin = Estuary by=20 allozyme analysis. IEP Newsletter 9(3):9-10.
Stanley SE, PB Moyle, = and HB=20 Shaffer. 1995. Allozyme analysis of delta smelt, Hypomesus = transpacificus, and=20 longfin smelt, Spirinchus thaleichthys, in the Sacramento-San Joaquin = Estuary,=20 California.
Swanson C, PS Young, = and JJ Cech,=20 Jr. 1998. Swimming performance of delta smelt: maximum performance, and=20 behavioral and kinematic limitations of swimming at submaximal = velocities. J.=20 Exp. Biol. 201:333-45.
Young PS, and JJ = Cech, Jr. 1996.=20 Environmental tolerances and requirements of splittail. Trans. Am. Fish. = Soc.=20 125:664-78.
Mark Pierce and Patricia = Brandes, US=20 Fish and Wildlife Service
The objective of the = Vernalis=20 Adaptive Management Plan (VAMP) is to evaluate the influence of flow and = export=20 on coded wired-tagged (CWT) smolt survival through the Sacramento-San = Joaquin=20 Delta (hereafter, delta) when the head of Old River barrier (HORB) is in = place.=20 In 1998, high flows on the San Joaquin River prevented installation of = the HORB,=20 hence smolt survival in the delta was measured without the barrier. This = study=20 was developed as part of survival investigations complementary to VAMP, = as=20 described in Appendix A of the VAMP conceptual framework.
Evaluation of smolt = survival in the=20 south delta has been done under the IEP since 1985. Results of this work = have=20 been reported in past newsletters and annual reports of the South Delta=20 Temporary Barriers Project (IEP Newsletter, Volume 11, Number 1, winter = 1998).=20 This report is limited to juvenile chinook delta survival and net pen = mortality=20 studies. Results of other study components such as water quality, dye = studies,=20 and physiological health evaluations will be reported elsewhere. (See = article in=20 this newsletter.)
During the spring of = 1998, two sets=20 of mark and recapture experiments using CWT chinook salmon were = conducted to=20 measure the survival of chinook smolts through the delta without a = barrier at=20 the head of upper Old River.
Flows on the San = Joaquin River at=20 Vernalis were high during the recovery period for both sets of releases, = averaging about 22,000 cfs for the first set and 18,500 cfs for the = second set.=20 Average combined exports at the SWP and CVP were about 1,500 cfs for the = first=20 set and about 1,800 cfs for the second set.
The first set of release = groups was=20 made using fish from the Merced River Fish Facility (MRFF) beginning on = 16=20 April, with releases on the San Joaquin River at Mossdale and Dos Reis = (above=20 and below the confluence of Old River) and at Jersey Point (Figure 1). = Because=20 fish availability at MRFF was limited in 1998, the second set of = releases used=20 fish from the Feather River Hatchery (FRH) and began on 23 April, with = release=20 sites similar to the first set, plus an additional release near the = mouth of the=20 Mokelumne River (Lighthouse Marina). There was one additional group of = Feather=20 River fish released at Mossdale on 6 May, which provided an additional = index of=20 survival over the last part of the evaluation period. Total release = numbers per=20 site are provided in Table 1. Average fork length of fish among the = release=20 groups ranged from 78 to 91 mm.
Figure 1 = Coded=20 wire-tagged (CWT) release and recovery sites used in the Sacramento-San = Joaquin=20 Delta during 1998
Midwater trawling at = Chipps Island=20 was conducted during daylight hours for approximately 400 minutes per = day=20 (doubling historical effort), seven days per week, from 16 April through = 30 May,=20 and continued at approximately 200 minutes per day until 13 June. Past = trawling=20 at Jersey Point had identified that peak catches occurred around dawn = and dusk,=20 so these periods were sampled at Chipps Island each day.
In addition to the = recovery effort=20 at Chipps Island, kodiak trawling was performed at Jersey Point, where = the=20 channel width is much narrower and thus a larger percentage of the = channel can=20 be sampled. From 15 April through 15 May, trawling here was conducted = throughout=20 the day and into the night; after 16 May this effort was scaled back. = This=20 effort was begun in 1997 as a pilot study in an attempt to increase raw = recovery=20 numbers (which had been very low through much of the 1990s), and to = obtain=20 additional independent estimates of survival.
Recoveries also were = made at the=20 Central Valley Project (CVP) and State Water Project (SWP) salvage=20 facilities.
A third set of = independent survival=20 estimates will be obtained in future years from recoveries made in the = ocean=20 fishery.
The survival index for = a given=20 release group between the release site to Chipps Island is calculated by = dividing the number of tags recovered in the midwater trawl at Chipps = Island=20 from each particular tag group by the number released, multiplied by the = fraction of time and channel width sampled at Chipps Island. Indices to = Jersey=20 Point are calculated similarly to those for Chipps Island using the = appropriate=20 expansions for fraction of time and channel width sampled.
Survival indices in = the south delta=20 had been very low through much of the 1990s. Net pen mortality studies = were=20 begun in 1997 to address the possibility of any immediate or short term=20 mortality associated with the stressors of trucking and handling or the=20 potential effects of temperature shock on the experimental fish = contributing to=20 this phenomenon. Continuing in 1998, immediately following each release, = 25 fish=20 was taken at random and weighed, measured, and evaluated for vigor and=20 mortality. These fish also were examined with regard to several criteria = to=20 determine their general health and to look for signs of disease. = Approximately=20 200 additional fish were then noted for vigor and mortality, and placed = in a=20 live pen on site and left for 48 hours. After the holding period, = another=20 subsample of 25 fish were evaluated as above for general condition and = health.=20 The remainder of the fish were weighed, measured, and again noted for = vigor and=20 mortality.
The releases at Jersey = Point and at=20 the mouth of the Mokelumne River (Lighthouse Marina) serve as downstream = controls for the recovery efforts at Chipps Island and Jersey Point,=20 respectively. Using the ratio of the survival indices of the upstream = group=20 relative to the downstream group provides a way to estimate absolute = survival=20 between the upstream and downstream location. This method is used to = allow=20 comparisons of Chipps Island indices among years, eliminating changes in = efficiency from year to year due to different environmental conditions. = This=20 ratio also provides a way to make more valid comparisons of survival = using=20 recovery information from both Jersey Point and Chipps = Island.
All recovery numbers = reported at=20 this time are preliminary and indices may change slightly based on the = results=20 of the quality control process of verifying tag codes.
Survival indices to = Chipps Island=20 for all three of the releases using Merced River stock were among the = highest=20 indices ever seen in the south delta for similar releases. Mossdale had = an index=20 of 0.56, Dos Reis, 0.60, and Jersey Point, 1.84 (see Table 1). Counter = to=20 previous results in most past years without a barrier, the similarity of = Mossdale and Dos Reis indices unexpectedly suggests that there was very = little=20 loss associated with the Old River diversion. This could suggest either = two=20 things: that during the high flows in 1998, (1) not many fish from the = Mossdale=20 release group were diverted into Old River or (2) the fish that were = diverted=20 into Old River had a higher rate of survival to Chipps Island than in = past=20 years. Both hypotheses could be true as a smaller percentage of water = and=20 presumably fish are diverted into upper Old River during high flows. In=20 addition, in past reports we have shown that survival through the delta = is=20 improved as flows increase.
The second set of = releases used=20 Feather River stock and yielded overall much lower survival indices to = Chipps=20 Island: 0.10 for Mossdale, 0.17 for Dos Reis, and 0.64 for Jersey Point. = Conditions changed somewhat, but were still very favorable. However, = there is a=20 more likely explanation for the lower overall indices than a slight = change in=20 hydrological conditions in the delta. The Feather River Hatchery = experienced a=20 severe outbreak of Infectious Hematopoietic Necrosis disease (IHN) and = many of=20 the early fish that were used for these release groups died over a = period of=20 several weeks at the hatchery. Thus, it is not valid to directly compare = the=20 survival indices of the two sets of releases. However, within this = Feather River=20 release set, different information was obtained regarding the extent of = loss=20 associated with Old River. Here, the difference in survival between the = Mossdale=20 and Dos Reis releases reflects the more typical, greater loss associated = with=20 Upper Old River seen in past experiments. The poorer condition of the = fish used=20 in this second release set may have not only decreased their overall = survival,=20 but had a larger negative impact on the survival of those fish migrating = through=20 upper Old River, thereby increasing the difference.
The Jersey Point = recoveries from the=20 first set releases reveal an overall lower survival trend than do the=20 corresponding Chipps Island recoveries, as the Mossdale index was 0.17 = and the=20 Dos Reis index was 0.33. This demonstrates a 50% loss from Mossdale to = Dos Reis,=20 which is directly counter to the survival trend seen in the Chipps = Island=20 recoveries for the first set of releases.
The second set of = releases revealed=20 an even lower set of survival indices, with the Mossdale index at 0.06, = and the=20 Dos Reis index at 0.07. These indices are virtually identical and = indicate no=20 significant loss from Mossdale to Dos Reis. This is also counter to the = result=20 obtained for the second set of releases at Chipps Island. The release at = Lighthouse Marina yielded an index of 0.55.
Survival indices to = Jersey Point=20 should be much higher than those to Chipps Island, given that the Jersey = Point=20 recovery site is farther upstream and mortality over this distance = should be=20 less. However, there may be several explanations for the opposite being=20 observed. Perhaps the expansion factor for the Jersey Point trawl could = be=20 improved or the efficiency of the Kodiak trawl for fish of this size = range is=20 lower than at Chipps Island. It also is likely that sampling at Jersey = Point=20 during night hours, when catches have been shown to be lower, = potentially=20 depresses the indices relative to Chipps Island. All of these factors = could=20 decrease the survival indices at Jersey Point relative to those at = Chipps=20 Island, but should not effect the trends between groups if the biases = were=20 consistent for all release groups.
More difficult to = explain is the=20 difference in trends observed between the Mossdale and Dos Reis groups = between=20 the Chipps Island and Jersey Point recovery locations. The trends are = not=20 consistent for the first or second set of releases. Part of this = difference may=20 be due to sampling variability.
Of interest is that = for the first=20 Mossdale release and for upstream tributary releases, raw recoveries = were higher=20 at Chipps Island than at Jersey Point (Tables 1 and 2). The cross = sectional area=20 of the channel sampled is much greater at Jersey Point, as was the = percentage of=20 time sampled making a higher number of raw recoveries at Jersey Point = than=20 Chipps Island more likely for all groups. It is uncertain why fewer of = the first=20 Mossdale group and tributary groups were recovered at Jersey Point. An=20 examination of the recovery distributions at both locations, with the = exception=20 of only a couple of fish from the tributary releases, eliminates the = possibility=20 that some fish may have passed by Chipps Island after the Jersey Point = trawl was=20 discontinued. Perhaps the fish migrating through upper Old River = bypassed the=20 Jersey Point recovery location by way of either Dutch Slough (see Figure = 1)=20 and/or through successful salvage operations. In this latter event, fish = collected at the salvage facilities are trucked and released at = locations=20 downstream of the Jersey trawl site, but are available for capture at = Chipps=20 Island. In 1998, however, total percent salvaged at the facilities for = the first=20 Mossdale group was so low (discussed below), it is doubtful that this = mechanism=20 explains the disparity in recovery numbers. More fish from the tributary = groups=20 were observed in salvage and potentially this could help explain the = discrepancy=20 in recovery numbers between the two locations for those groups (see = Table 2).=20 Other possible explanations could include movement of the fish from the = San=20 Joaquin River into the Sacramento River by way of Threemile Slough on = certain=20 tides, but this mechanism should have had a similar impact on recoveries = of all=20 groups released upstream of Jersey Point, which was not seen.
Recoveries of these = releases=20 (expanded for the fraction of time sampled) at the salvage facilities = were=20 relatively low compared to similar releases in previous years. Fish from = the=20 Mossdale releases did show up at the CVP for both the first set (n=3D48) = and the=20 second set of releases (n=3D192), but the percentages of total release = salvaged=20 were low, 0.06% and 0.5%, respectively. The expanded number salvaged = does not=20 include the losses associated with screen efficiency and predation = losses at the=20 facilities. Thus the estimates of loss would be greater than the = expanded=20 salvage reported here.
The last group = released at Mossdale=20 on 6 May had the greatest number of expanded recoveries (n=3D624), = possibly=20 because many of these fish may have remained in the system after the = evaluation=20 period, when total exports increased to 2,400-3,600 cfs. No fish from = the=20 Mossdale releases were seen at the SWP, nor were any fish from the Dos = Reis or=20 Jersey Point releases seen at either facility. Most likely, this is = attributable=20 to the combination of high flows and low exports, a condition where fish = released below the head of Old River are not as likely to move into the = southern=20 delta and be susceptible to the pumps. In 1998, low exports and high San = Joaquin=20 River flows seemed to be effective at minimizing direct losses at the=20 pumps.
For the Merced River = fish releases,=20 water temperature differences between the truck and the river were small = (2 to 3=20 =B0C) (Table 3). For both the Mossdale and Dos Reis groups, the fish = were without=20 exception in very good condition and very vigorous both immediately = after=20 release and after being held for 48 hours. Mortality was not observed = among=20 these releases after 48 hours. The exception was at Jersey Point where = several=20 fish appeared to be lethargic in the pen immediately after release and = several=20 more were found dead after 48 hours, resulting in a mortality rate of = 1.6%.
For the Feather River = releases,=20 truck and river water temperature differences were somewhat greater (1.3 = to 7=20 =B0C). Probably more significant, however, was the health and condition = of the=20 fish. Signs of IHN were evident to varying extents in each of the = release=20 groups, most severely at Jersey Point. At release, the April 23 Mossdale = group=20 looked good and only a few minor signs of disease were apparent; = however, the=20 mortality rate for this group after 48 hours was high--7.2%. At Dos = Reis,=20 although fish were vigorous, they had a bronze tint rather than a bright = silver=20 color and many had paler gills. The final mortality rate here was only = 2%. The=20 condition of the fish released at Lighthouse Marina was similar, where = the final=20 mortality rate was only 1%. Finally, the fish released at Jersey Point = appeared=20 to be in the worst shape. Again they had a bronze tint and many had pale = gills.=20 Several fish were already dead upon release, fin hemorrhaging was seen = and some=20 eyes were visibly "bugged." After 48 hours, the mortality rate of this = group was=20 9.2%.
Assuming the mortality = rate for fish=20 actually released into the river is similar to that of the fish held in = the net=20 pens (although it may differ for various reasons, such as an increase in = vulnerability to predation), we can consider that any percentage of the = fish=20 dying within the first two days after release (due to poor health and = not=20 environmental conditions) are not likely to survive long enough to be = vulnerable=20 to the recovery trawl. It is then appropriate to apply the observed = mortality=20 rate to the entire release, and calculate an adjusted survival index. In = most=20 cases in 1998, the change in the index due to this adjustment is = negligible, but=20 for the second Jersey Point release, the index changed from 0.64 to 0.71 = (see=20 Table 1). The index increases because as the effective release number is = decreased, a larger portion of the release group is assumed to have = survived to=20 Chipps Island.
Absolute survival = between an=20 upstream and downstream location can be estimated using the ratios of = the=20 upstream to downstream survival indices to allow comparisons to past = releases.=20 The Mossdale to Jersey Point absolute survival estimate, based on Chipps = Island=20 recoveries, was 0.30 for the first set of releases (see Table 1). This = compares=20 favorably to absolute survival estimates generated in past years (Figure = 2) and=20 shows that survival from Mossdale to Jersey Point is related to flow at=20 Vernalis. Future analyses will be conducted to determine if the 1998 = data shed=20 any light on how CVP and SWP exports affect survival through the = delta.
For the second set of = releases, the=20 Mossdale to Jersey Point absolute survival estimate, based on Chipps = Island=20 recoveries, was 0.16, roughly half that of the first group. The = environmental=20 conditions did not change considerably from the first release set to the = next,=20 and the observed decrease in absolute survival may be more a result of = the=20 questionable health of the fish. However, adjusted indices based on the = net pen=20 studies changed the absolute survival estimate from Mossdale to Jersey = Point=20 only slightly (0.16 to 0.15), and does not sufficiently account for the = large=20 apparent decrease observed in survival from the first release set. Thus = the=20 decrease in survival for the second group of fish could be due to stock=20 differences as noted in previous experiments and/or due to an = underestimate of=20 the mortality due to IHN infection.
Although there are many = reasons for not=20 directly comparing the survival estimates generated at Chipps Island to = those=20 generated at Jersey Point, the ratios of the survival indices of the = upstream=20 and downstream groups can be used to factor out differences between = recovery=20 locations. Unfortunately, due to a shortage of available fish from the = MRFF,=20 there was no control group for the first set of releases in 1998 for the = Jersey=20 Point trawl, and thus no absolute survival estimate can be generated. = For the=20 second set of releases a control group was released at the mouth of the=20 Mokelumne River at Lighthouse Marina. The ratio of survival indices of = the=20 Mossdale group relative to the mouth of the Mokelumne group should allow = for=20 valid comparisons between Chipps Island and Jersey Point data. The = absolute=20 survival between Mossdale and Lighthouse Marina was 0.11 for recoveries = at=20 Jersey Point and 0.15 at Chipps Island. The two survival estimates are = in fairly=20 good agreement, indicating that although the relative survival indices = to Jersey=20 Point are somewhat low, the absolute estimates are close to that based = on Chipps=20 Island data.
Figure 2 = Absolute smolt=20 survival between Mossdale and Jersey Point versus flow at Vernalis = (cfs). Data=20 obtained when the barrier was in place (circles) are not included in the = regression. All releases were made using fish from the Feather River = Hatchery=20 with the exception of the 1998 MRFF data point as = marked.
David Christophel (Beak = Consultants),=20 Gary Lawley (Clearwater Environmental Inc.), and Leo Winternitz = (Department of=20 Water Resources)
Prospect Island is = located in Solano=20 County in the northwestern part of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. The = island=20 is bounded by the Sacramento River Deep Water Ship Channel to the west, = the=20 remnants of Little Holland Tract to the north, Miner Slough to the east, = and the=20 confluence of Miner Slough and the ship channel to the south. The = objective of=20 the Prospect Island Restoration Project is to restore aquatic ecosystem=20 structure and processes to benefit fish and wildlife. Specifically, = plans have=20 been developed to create shallow water habitat that provides for = suitable=20 feeding, cover and resting habitat for delta smelt, splittail, other = native=20 resident fishes, anadromous fish, waterfowl and shorebirds. Partners in = the=20 restoration project are the US Army Corps of Engineers, the US Bureau of = Reclamation, the US Fish and Wildlife Service, and the California = Department of=20 Water Resources.
In January 1997, prior = to the=20 initiation of habitat restoration work on Prospect Island, the Miner = Slough=20 levee breached at two locations. An internal cross-levee that separated = the=20 project site from flooded property owned by the Port of Sacramento also=20 breached, allowing water from the Port property to mix with water at the = project=20 site. Prospect Island remained flooded until October 1998 when the levee = breeches were repaired. The island was partially dewatered in = preparation for=20 construction of habitat project features scheduled for fall 1999. As = required by=20 the National Marine Fisheries Service and the US Fish and Wildlife = Service, the=20 project to dewater the island included a fish monitoring and fish = recovery plan.=20 Fish recovery (in other words, salvage of fish trapped on the island) = was only=20 to be implemented if any target species were collected in the monitoring = efforts. Target species included chinook salmon (winter-run, fall-run, = late-fall=20 run, and spring-run), steelhead, delta smelt, and splittail.
Pumping to dewater = Prospect Island=20 began on 15 October. Clearwater Environmental Inc. (a contractor to US = Army=20 Corps of Engineers) and Beak Consultants (a subcontractor to Clearwater, = Inc.)=20 conducted random fish sampling over a three-week period commencing on 15 = October. Sampling was conducted during the daylight hours and after dark = (evening or predawn) using two beach seines, a 95 ft by 8 ft seine with = -inch=20 mesh, and a thirty-five-foot by four-foot seine with 3/16-inch mesh. = Habitats=20 sampled included the open water shallows (no emergent vegetation), = emergent=20 vegetation shallows, and deep-water channels with and without emergent=20 vegetation. Although not tested, sampling efficiency was likely lower in = the=20 deep-water channels and areas with emergent vegetation.
A total of 3,663 fish = representing=20 25 species (6 native, 19 introduced) was collected between 15 October = and 29=20 October (Table 1). No target species were collected on Prospect Island = however,=20 this was expected given the time of year of the sampling. Life stages = collected=20 ranged from young-of-the-year to adults. There appeared to be a marked=20 difference in species and life stages captured between nighttime and = daytime=20 with more pelagic species and adults captured during night sampling. = Most of the=20 introduced species caught typically inhabit slow-moving, backwater-type = habitat.=20 The most numerous species collected were threadfin shad, inland = silversides,=20 American shad, striped bass, sunfish (various species), golden shiner, = and=20 common carp. Together, these species constituted about 93% of the total = catch.=20 Native species collected included the Sacramento blackfish, hardhead, = hitch,=20 Sacramento squawfish, sculpin, and tule perch. These species constituted = less=20 than 2% of the total catch.
The three-week = sampling effort at=20 Prospect Island was designed to determine the presence of target fish = species=20 rather than to comprehensively evaluate the relative abundance and = distribution=20 of fish species. Despite the limited scope of the sampling effort we = believe=20 that the results reasonably reflect the species composition of the fish=20 assemblage occupying Prospect Island at the time of sampling. The number = of=20 individual fish of each species contained in the catch, however, was = likely=20 strongly influenced by the selectivity and efficiency of the sampling = gear and=20 may not accurately characterize the relative abundance of the various = species=20 within the fish community at Prospect Island. The interpretation of = results may=20 also be complicated by the interchange between the fish assemblages = occupying=20 Prospect Island and the Port of Sacramento property that resulted when = the cross=20 levee that separates both properties breached. The extent to which this=20 interaction may have influenced species interaction at Prospect Island = is=20 unknown. Nevertheless, the results suggest that non-native fish species = will=20 dominate shallow water habitats in the north delta in early fall when = most of=20 the migratory native fish are likely downstream. These results are = generally=20 consistent with the findings of the IEP Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta = Breached=20 Levee Wetland study in the central delta (Grimaldo and others 1998). = This=20 information is particularly interesting because a significant portion of = the=20 CALFED Program's restoration actions include restoration of shallow = water=20 habitat, primarily to benefit native species, which include those = targeted in=20 the Prospect Island sampling.
The apparent dominance = of non-native=20 fish at Prospect Island in the early fall does not necessarily imply = that=20 creation or restoration of shallow water habitat will not benefit native = fish.=20 However, it does suggest that the actual results of perennial shallow = water=20 habitat restoration in the delta may differ substantially from the = expected=20 benefits or results for native fish. The preliminary results of the IEP = shallow=20 water sampling study and the Prospect Island fish sampling emphasize the = importance of monitoring restoration sites to confirm that project = objectives=20 are met and to provide the basis for modifying habitat management = techniques to=20 provide greater benefit to native fish species. These considerations are = particularly important since a significant portion of the CALFED = Program's=20 restoration actions include restoration of shallow water habitat = primarily to=20 benefit native species, which include those targeted in the Prospect = Island=20 sampling.
Grimaldo L, B = Harrell, R Miller,=20 and Z Hymanson. 1998. Determining the Importance of Shallow Water = Habitat in the=20 Delta to Resident and Migratory Fishes: A New Challenge for IEP. IEP = Newsletter=20 11(3):32-4.
In the previous issue = of the IEP=20 Newsletter (fall 1998, Volume 11, Number 4, pages 38-42), Figure 1 in = the=20 article "Swimming Performance, Behavior, and Physiology of Delta Fishes = in=20 Complex Flows Near a Fish Screen: Biological Studies Using the Fish = Treadmill"=20 by C. Swanson, P.S. Young, and J.J. Cech, Jr., was incorrectly modified = during=20 reproduction. In that version of the figure, the directions of the = approach,=20 sweeping, and resultant flow vectors were reversed and thus presented a=20 seriously inaccurate diagram of the fish treadmill and its operation. A = correct=20 version of the figure is presented below. For further questions = regarding the=20 fish treadmill design, operation, and biological studies or to arrange a = visit=20 to observe fish treadmill experiments, please contact Christina Swanson = by=20 telephone or e-mail. Telephone: (530) 752-8659; E-mail:=20 cswanson@ucdavis.edu.
Figure 1 = Top view=20 diagram of the fish treadmill swimming channel. The outer rotating = screen is at=20 top, the inner fixed screen is at bottom. Arrows indicate the directions = of the=20 approach, sweeping, and resultant flow vectors.
Lauren Buffaloe, = Department of Water=20 Resources
Accuracy is = fundamental in=20 scientific writing. It is the policy of the editors of the IEP = Newsletter to=20 promptly acknowledge errors in the Errata section. Mistakes should be = called to=20 the attention of Lauren Buffaloe by calling (916) 227-1375.
As of 15 March 1998, = Sustainable=20 Conservation's new offices are located at 109 Stevenson Street, 4th = Floor, San=20 Francisco, CA 94105. Telephone: (415) 977-0380; Fax: (415) 977-0381; = E-mail:=20 suscon@igc.org; Internet URL: http://www.suscon.org. Please make a note = of these=20 changes.
Dawn Friend, Department = of Water=20 Resources
Between 1 October and = 31 December=20 1998, the average Net Delta Outflow was 26,546 cfs, with a peak outflow = of=20 66,070 cfs occurring on 8 December 1998. This peak was the result of = reservoir=20 releases made for flood control purposes in response to significant=20 precipitation over previous days. During the last half of the quarter, = no CVP=20 pumping took place in order to accommodate scheduled maintenance. = Combined SWP=20 and CVP pumping averaged about 5,100 cfs during this period. All data = presented=20 are considered preliminary by the source.