pete lawson, libby logerwell, nate mantua, bob francis, and vera agostini
DESCRIPTION
Closing the Loop: Modeling the coho salmon life cycle in the context of habitat, climate, and management. Pete Lawson, Libby Logerwell, Nate Mantua, Bob Francis, and Vera Agostini. Queets River. O. D. O. O. D. OCN Coho. O. O. D. O. D. OCN Oregon Coastal Natural Coho salmon - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Closing the Loop: Modeling the coho salmon life cycle in the context of habitat,
climate, and management
Pete Lawson, Libby Logerwell, Nate Mantua, Bob Francis, and Vera Agostini
OCN Coho
Queets River
Air Temperature Data
Streamflow Data
OCNOregon Coastal NaturalCoho salmon
•Aggregate of 13 basins•Rain-fed streams•Threatened status (on and off)
The OCN Problem:OCN Recruits (t+1) and Spawners (t-2)
0.0
100.0
200.0
300.0
400.0
500.0
600.0
19
69
19
70
19
71
19
72
19
73
19
74
19
75
19
76
19
77
19
78
19
79
19
80
19
81
19
82
19
83
19
84
19
85
19
86
19
87
19
88
19
89
19
90
19
91
19
92
19
93
19
94
19
95
19
96
19
97
19
98
19
99
Smolt Year
Co
ho
Salm
on
(x 1
000)
OCN Spawners (t-2)
OCN Recruits (t+1)
OCN Recruits (t+1) and OPIH survival (t)
0.0
100.0
200.0
300.0
400.0
500.0
600.0
1968 1973 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998
Smolt Year
Recru
its (
x 1
000)
0.0000
0.0200
0.0400
0.0600
0.0800
0.1000
0.1200
0.1400
Mari
ne S
urv
ival
OCN Recruits (t+1)
OPIH Marine Survival (t)
OCN smolts and smolts/spawner reconstructed from OPIH- and GAM-estimated marine survivals. 1992 estimate omitted from analysis.
0.0
1000.0
2000.0
3000.0
4000.0
5000.0
6000.0
7000.0
8000.01
96
9
19
70
19
71
19
72
19
73
19
74
19
75
19
76
19
77
19
78
19
79
19
80
19
81
19
82
19
83
19
84
19
85
19
86
19
87
19
88
19
89
19
90
19
91
19
92
19
93
19
94
19
95
19
96
19
97
19
98
19
99
Smolt Year
Sm
olt
s (
x 1
000)
0.0
50.0
100.0
150.0
200.0
250.0
300.0
350.0
400.0
450.0
500.0
Sm
olt
s p
er
Sp
aw
ner
Adjusted Smolts
Adjusted Smolts per Spawner
1992
Environmental data sets -- freshwater
• 1969-1999 smolt year
• Stream Flow– From 6 USGS gauging stations
• Monthly mean flow
• Standardized at each station, then averaged
• Air Temperature– From 3 WRCC locations
• Annual mean air temperature
• Standardized at each station, then averaged
AnnTemp
parti
al fo
r Ann
Tem
p
-1 0 1 2
-300
0-1
000
010
00
Trans
parti
al fo
r Tra
ns
280 300 320 340
-200
00
1000
P4
bs(P
4, k
nots
= 0
, deg
ree
= 1)
-2 -1 0 1 2
-300
0-1
000
010
00
P5
parti
al fo
r P5
-1 0 1 2
-200
00
1000
Partial plots for OCN smolts
Winter Flow (t1) Spring Flow (t1)
Fall TransitionvFall TransitionAnnual Temperature
Year
Ad
j Sm
olts
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
10
00
20
00
30
00
40
00
50
00
60
00
70
00
ObservedPredicted
Observed and fitted OCN smolts
Year
Sm
olts
So why should we believe this?
•One basin•Glacier-fed•1981-2000 smolt years•Smolts and spawners measured directly•No dams•Flow data from USGS -- one station•Air temperature data from WRCC -- one station
Because I repeated the analysis with a completely independent data set
from the Queets River, Washington.
AnnTemp
part
ial f
or A
nnTe
mp
-1 0 1 2
-1.5
*10^
50
10^5
P4
bs(P
4, k
nots
= 0
, deg
ree
= 1
)
-1 0 1 2
-2*1
0^5
-10^
50
10^5
Year
Sm
olts
1985 1990 1995 2000
10
00
00
15
00
00
20
00
00
25
00
00
30
00
00
35
00
00
40
00
00
ObservedPredicted
Annual Temperature Winter Flow (t1)
Sm
olts
Year
Results for Queets Smolts
The bottom line:Marine and freshwater environmental variables are correlated so that good (poor) marine survival is associated with good (poor) freshwater production.
Year SST.JFM.t0 Trans UW.AMJ SST.JFM.t1
SST.JFM.t0 0.466 1
Trans 0.246 0.225 1
UW.AMJ -0.239 -0.196 -0.462 1
SST.JFM.t1 0.439 0.134 0.261 -0.140 1
Fall Trans 0.058 -0.019 -0.235 0.011 0.124
P4 -0.054 -0.125 0.352 0.175 -0.054
P5 0.156 0.047 0.468 -0.399 0.082
Ann Temp 0.676 0.375 0.424 -0.461 0.359
Mar
ine
Fre
shw
ater
OO++
Spawners
Early Late
fecundity
Eggs
*
*
OO++
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0% 25% 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200%
Percent of Full Seeding (P)
Egg-
to-P
arr S
urvi
val R
ate
Sparr = 0.064P-0.743
R2 = 0.68
4 Fish per Mile
12% of Full Seeding
19% of Full Seeding
50% of Full Seeding
75% of full Seeding
899 21,700 3,596 NA 4,123 10,850 16,275
1,163 55,000 4,652 NA 10,450 27,500 41,250
1,685 50,000 6,740 NA 9,500 25,000 37,500
450 5,400 NA 86 1,026 2,700 4,050
4,197 132,100 25,099 66,050 99,075
(based on return of jacks per hatchery smolt)
HighMediumLowExtremely Low(>0.0040 jacks/smolt)(0.0015 to 0.0039)
M R
Marine Survival Index
Parent Spawner
Status 1/
0 - 8% 0 - 8% 0 - 8% 0 - 8%
< 15%
< 15%
< 15%
< 11%
15,074Coastwide Total
(<0.0008 jacks/smolt) (0.0008 to 0.0014 )
Sub-aggregate and Basin Specific Spawner Criteria Data
Northern
North - Central
South - Central
Southern
< 8%
< 8%
< 11%
< 15% < 25%
L
< 11%
Q
J
I
H
G
O
< 30%
N
< 20%
T
< 45%
S
< 38%
Sub-aggregate
HighParent Spawners > 75% of full seeding
Miles of Available Spawning Habitat
E
D
C
B
< 8%
< 8%
100% of Full
Seeding
"Critical" Very Low, Low, Medium & High
A K P
Parent Spawners > 4 fish per mile & < 19% of full seeding
Critical 2/
Parental Spawners < 4 fish per mile
MediumParent Spawners > 50% & < 75% of full seeding
LowParent Spawners > 19% & < 50% of full seeding
Very Low
F
Year
1900 1950 2000 2050 2100
Sta
nd
ard
ize
d A
no
ma
ly
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
1950 2000
OC
N C
oho Index
0
1500
Observed PDO Projected PNA
PopulationDynamics
FreshwaterHabitat
Climate Patterns
Marine Survival
HarvestManagement
MetapopulationDynamics
33 Generation Time Series of Spawning Escapements with
Zero Harvest and Two Harvest StrategiesT
ho
us
an
ds
of
Sp
aw
ne
rs
0
200
400
600
800
0
200
400
600
800
1000
Generation
0 10 20 300
200
400
600
800
Base
Exploitation Rate
Escapement Goal = 200 thousand
<= 35%
Probability of Extinction in 100 Years
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
BasinNehalem
Tillamook
Nestucca
North Tribs
Siletz
Yaquina
Alsea
Siuslaw
Mid Tribs
Umpqua
Coos
Coquille
Rogue
Base Exp. Rate Esc. Goal
Local Extinction Probabilities withZero Harvest and Two Harvest Policies
Nine Questions to Validate Models
1. Is the structure adequate to serve the purposes for which it will be used?
2. What characteristics of the simulated system have been left out or simplified?
3. What might the effects be?
4. How do model structure and behavior compare to similar models?
5. How are uncertainty and error incorporated into the analysis, and how do the results depend on uncertainties and assumptions?
Nine Questions to Validate Models (cont'd)
6. Are the parameter definitions and ranges justifiable?
7. Does the model produce expected behaviors for ordinary, as well as extraordinary cases-i.e., have the authors defined the range over which the model is valid, and the circumstances under which the model is questionable or invalid?
8. Does the model respond appropriately and usefully to simulated policies?
9. How does the analysis relate to the problem as it is defined, and the conclusions drawn?
c: Population Size
b: Ocean Environment
a: Freshwater Habitat Quality
=
+
DCB
A
Time
Esca
pe
men
t
0
Lawson 1993
Year
1900 1950 2000 2050 2100
Sta
nd
ard
ize
d A
no
mal
y
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
1950 2000
OC
N C
oho
Inde
x
0
1500
Observed PDO Projected PNA
PDO Projected by Hadley Centre Model
Peter LawsonNMFS/NWFSC2030 SE Marine Science DriveNewport, OR [email protected]