Participants who did not get answers to their questions during the course of the conference were asked to put them in writing. Questions submitted and replies follow. All replies were prepared by Walt Duffy, U.S. Geological Survey.

What role do more biologically intact watersheds such as the
Salmon River play in the recovery of the native anadromous fish of the
Klamath Basin, highlighting spring Chinook and Green Sturgeon?

There is no definitive answer to this question, although we assume
sub-basins like the Salmon are important to the species mentioned.
Spring run Chinook salmon historically ascended the Klamath beyond the
present dams, and into major tributaries (Shasta, Scott, Salmon and
Trinity). The Salmon River will contribute to recovery, but fish using
the Salmon River cannot be expected to contribute substantially to
recovery in more distant sub-basins, for example the Trinity. Think of
the population in the Klamath basin as a series of sub-populations, each
using different geographic regions. This is the meta-population
concept.

Less is known about the population structure of green sturgeon. I have
to assume this species also segregates into somewhat discreet units, but
I'm not sure anyone can tell you.

For Chinook salmon, Erick Bjorkstedt with NOAA Fisheries in Santa Cruz
is leading the TRT for Chinook salmon in this area and may have some
insights. For green sturgeon, Dave Hillamire with the Yurok Tribe has
been involved with some work on this species (tracking movement, etc.).

What are the effects that the Klamath River Mainstem Sub-basin
have on out migrating Spring Chinook smolts from the Salmon River?

No one knows the answer to this question. Work is needed to better
understand the physiological performance and survival of spring Chinook
smolts (as well as other species).

Will we develop a sustainable Harvest Mgt. Plan to help wild
spring Chinook runs? Do the different stocks (wild & hatchery, runs
from sub-basins) always interming as smolts in the mainstem Klamath
below Trinity/Klamath Confluence, in the Ocean, and as returning adults
in the estuary lower river? Can we target Hatchery Spring Chinook for
harvest?

Multiple questions here. First, harvest plans are developed by the
Pacific Fisheries Management Council, consisting of NOAA Fisheries and
state agencies. I don't believe they have distinguished spring run fish
from fall run fish in the Klamath, but I am not certain. In short, I
don't believe anyone is drafting a sustainable harvest plan for these
fish.

Second, Chinook salmon smolts from different wild stocks (spring, fall,
different sub-basins) always overlap in the estuary to some degree and
probably always have. Most Chinook salmon movement through the estuary
is during spring and fall. Hatchery fish are released and enter the
estuary late in the summer. So, they overlap with those wild fish
moving through in the fall. In the ocean? I do not believe anyone has
investigated the wild/hatchery distribution of adults in the ocean.
Wild and hatchery fish definitely co-mingle when returning to the river
from the ocean.

In reference to "ecosystem" studies on the Klamath Basin, why
are there so few other taxons utilized? Increase studies with a aquatic
mactoinverts and amohibions reptiles and bird mammals.

Why indeed! The short answer is funding. Mention Klamath and people
think Chinook salmon. It is difficult to secure funds to investigate
other less glamorous species. Having said that, there are and have been
studies of other taxa.

The two species that should have increase focus are: Green
Sturgeon and Western Pond Turtles. Both K-selected and long lived
species-turtles have residents that are pre-dam and should be a model
species to focus on.

Yes, these species should receive more attention. Species of sturgeon
are declining worldwide. Mostly because they are long lived, do not
reproduce until they are 10 or more years old and are the subject of
harvest. That caviar you buy at $100 per ounce makes a single female
beluga worth $20,000 - $30,000, even more. Although North American
sturgeons are harvested mostly for flesh, not caviar, they are also in
trouble.

Western pond turtles in the Trinity River were investigated by a HSU
grad student some 20 years ago. This fellow is now a herpetologist with
USGS. His work is being followed up by Hart Welsch who is with the U.S.
Forest Service lab in Arcata. Hart is finding some of the same
individuals marked 20 years earlier.

I would add freshwater Unionid mussels to the list. Unionids live
40-100 years and, like the above species, can suffer multiple insults
during their life span.

Regarding fish health/disease issues: Can more of the hatchery
fish be marked to assist in determining if "fish kill" individuals? Are
hatchery raised over wild salmon and can samples be taken for
contaminants to determine correlation between sub-lethal contaminant
exposure and mortality due t disease? Can baseline blood parameters be
taken from both wild and hatchery salmon to better elucidate fish health
before disease outbreaks?

Can more fish be marked before being released from hatcheries? Of course! You may remember that John Williams, the workshop reviewer from NOAA in Seattle, recommended 100% marking and noted that the process can be automated. Again, someone has to secure the funding to do this.

As for blood parameters, I think this could easily be done on smolts as a monitoring tool. I would defer to a physiologist or disease specialist on what parameters to measure. On adult fish it could be more problematic since they are going to be stressed much more by
capture. But again, a physiologist may give a different answer.