Oregon Coast Coho Conservation Plan
An Overview of the Oregon Coast
Conservation Plan (OCCCP)
Dan Avery
ODFW Coastal Implementation Coordinator
[email protected]
541-265-8306 x235
Oregon Coast Coho Conservation Plan
(OCCCP)
“The goal of recovery and restoration is not merely to meet a set of artificial criteria.
But rather to restore or repair ecological processes that lead to long term- term
sustainability” NOAA 2008
•Plan Overview
•Conservation Goals
•Implementation Team
•Implementation Plan
•Prioritization Protocols
Plan History

Approved by the Oregon Fish and Wildlife
Commission in early 2007.

Is a requirement of The Native Fish
Conservation Policy (NFCP).

The NFCP was adopted in 2002 to support
and increase the effectiveness of the 1997
Oregon Plan.
Effect of Local Restoration Dollars

Since 1997 OWEB invested about $168M resulting in 2700
jobs, and $400M in total economic activity. For each $1
OWEB spent an additional $1.48 is invested by state and
federal programs, philanthropic organizations, private
landowners, and others.

Direct effects on employment – 4.8 to 13.1 jobs / $1M

Indirect effects on employment – 3.9 to 5.7 jobs / $1M
From: Economic and Employment Impacts of Forest and Watershed Restoration in Oregon – 2010 U of O
Another reason – the economy
$2.5 Billion in 2008
-
Almost 2.8 million people
the economy
the economy
Plan Overview
The primary goal of the OCCCP:
Increase the
productive capacity of
OCN coho and their
habitat to levels
significantly higher
than where the ESU
could be considered a
potential candidate
for listing under
federal ESA.
Planning Strategies and Actions
1.
2.
3.
4.
Define the management unit, or ESU.
Determine its current status.
Define a desired status.
Determine any gap between current and desired status and the
factors causing the gap (limiting factors).
5. Identify and implement strategies and actions that address the
limiting factors.
6. Monitor and evaluate the ESU status and actions implemented and
use adaptive management to make adjustments necessary to
achieve desired status.
The Management Unit
21 independent
populations
and
36 dependent
populations
The four scales are important for defining attributes related
to biological processes that define ESU status: watersheds,
populations, biogeographic strata, and the entire ESU
Current Status / Desired status
Current Status
Listed as Threatened under the Federal ESA.
Desired Status
ESU as a whole is: 1) self-sustaining into the foreseeable
future, and 2) providing significant ecological, cultural, and
economic benefits.
Define a desired status
Determine any gap between current
and desired status
Habitat Limiting Factors Model (HLFM)
Estimates seasonal rearing
capacity by multiplying habitat
surface areas by average
densities observed in fully seeded
streams
Estimates smolt capacity by
Multiplying season rearing
capacity by density independent
life stage to smolt mortality rate
Limiting Factors and Threats
Limiting factors can be naturally occurring or human induced
Threats are the potential adverse impacts of human activities.
Known Issues
Ocean Conditions as a
limiting factor
Stream Complexity
/Over-winter rearing
habitat as a limiting
factor/threat
Predation as a
limiting factor
/threat
Threats
For OC coho the primary threats are

Harvest

Hatcheries

Habitat Management
Harvest
Oregon Coastal wild coho fishery exploitation rates
100%
Bay and river exploitation rate
90%
Ocean exploitation rate
80%
Exploitation rate
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
Year
1995
2000
2005
2010
19
60
19
62
19
64
19
66
19
68
19
70
19
72
19
74
19
76
19
78
19
80
19
82
19
84
19
86
19
88
19
90
19
92
19
94
19
96
19
98
20
00
20
02
20
04
20
06
20
08
20
10
smolts (millions)
Hatcheries
Oregon Coast hatchery coho smolt releases
30
25
Public Hatchery Smolts
Release year
Private Hatchery Smolts
20
15
10
5
0
OCN spawners –vs- smolts at 9 traps – excludes NF Nehalem
120000
100000
80000
60000
smolts
40000
adults
20000
0
year 1996
1997 1998
1999 2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
adults
smolts
2007
2008
2009
Habitat
Habitat
Simplified habitat
Produces 0.25 fish /m2
Added complexity
Produces 0.95 fish /m2
Simplified Habitat
Produces 0.25 fish /m2
beavers
Produces 1.5 – 3.5 fish /m2
Simplified Habitat
Produces < 0.25 fish /m2
wetland complexes
Produces 1.5 – 3.5 fish /m2
Strategies and Actions

This is what happens in the implementation plan

Encompass existing activities by watershed councils,
SWCDs, land owners and state and federal land managers

Increase coordination and communication to facilitate the
more complex restoration projects that we need to take on.

Align goals ESU wide across state and federal agencies and
on-the ground implementers

Manage limited funding

Engage adaptive management
RM&E
The plan is intended to be implemented with a strong adaptive management
component. Research, Monitoring and Evaluation are the keys to adaptive
management.
validate
key assumptions and clarify critical uncertainties
associated with the identification of primary limiting factors;
and
monitor
the status and trend of coho populations and their habitat;
evaluate
the effectiveness of key habitat protection, management, and
restoration actions.
Research
Research Topics identified in the OCCCP
ocean survival of coho and
1. Research on the mechanisms that cause poor
methods to predict ocean survival conditions.
limiting factors throughout the
2. Research the relative importance of potential
entire freshwater and estuarine residence of coho.
3. Evaluate the contribution that habitat protection, management, and restoration programs
have toward
4.
achieving desired status goals
Validate and refine the Coho Winter High Intrinsic Potential Model
promote beaver dams in areas
5. Evaluate methods to maintain, enhance, or
where they can create or maintain high quality coho rearing habitat.
6. Evaluate causes and impacts of marine mammal, avian and exotic fish
Oregon Coastal Coho
7. Evaluate re-establishment of a self-sustaining population of coho in
predation on
Salmon River
prioritize restoration projects at local
8. Develop tools to identify and
watershed and stream-reach scales.
Monitoring – ESU Scale
Estimates of coho spawners
ODFW – OASIS
Juvenile coho density and distribution ODFW – WORP
Marine and Freshwater survival ODFW- LCM
Monitoring – ESU Scale
Habitat Quality - ODFW AQI
Evaluation
Evaluation to support adaptive management

Oregon commits to assess the ESU and the effectiveness of
the Conservation Plan (in 6 years, every 12 years
thereafter, or as needed).

Oregon will produce a succinct annual report – an early
warning system –that will alert Oregon to the need to
reconsider the status of the Coast coho ESU, monitoring,
and management systems in place throughout the ESU.
Annual Reports
ODFW is responsible for coordinating the annual report for Oregon
Coast Coho as well as the other conservation/recovery plans that
are in place or are being developed.
Specific tasks for 2011- 2012
Implementation team
 Prioritization scheme
 3 year implementation schedule
 Annual report

Summary
Conservation Plans / Implementation
Plans are required
 Plans have a logical structure
 Building on existing groups / work
 Increase coordination / communication
 Manage limited funding
 Adaptive management

Contact info
Dan Avery
ODFW Coast Implementation Coordinator
810 SW Alder St., Unit C
Newport, OR 97365
541-265-8306
[email protected]
http://odfwrecoverytracker.org
http://www.dfw.state.or.us/fish/CRP/conservation_recovery_plans
.asp.