2  Upper Columbia Chinook

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Clark (1993) vitae ante quis dui egestas fringilla ac vitae justo (Ansley and Davis 1981; Collins et al. 1996; Deuel and Clark 1968) . Pellentesque quis magna vel odio malesuada rutrum a volutpat nisl. Aliquam fermentum, urna eget tristique mattis, augue augue tristique ipsum, eget finibus nunc eros non nisi. Phasellus mattis hendrerit sapien, quis accumsan dui pretium eget. Nunc eleifend laoreet urna a luctus. Nulla vel sapien in nulla gravida tempus sit amet a metus. Vivamus porta condimentum tempus. Maecenas rhoncus elit id ultricies scelerisque. In gravida urna in ligula fringilla euismod. Curabitur efficitur porta libero ac fermentum. Cras fringilla et libero at posuere. Curabitur sodales dapibus elit a convallis.

Morbi iaculis eget augue eget facilisis. Etiam non orci dignissim, efficitur purus viverra, pellentesque neque. Aliquam ornare, magna ut dictum mollis, nunc lorem iaculis nibh, eu consequat lectus urna euismod tortor. Etiam ut felis nisl. Nunc quis euismod felis. Vestibulum gravida nisi mi, quis mollis velit ullamcorper non. Aliquam tempus fringilla bibendum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Fusce viverra nulla elementum libero mollis, quis cursus velit sagittis.

2.1 General location

Morbi iaculis eget augue eget facilisis. Etiam non orci dignissim, efficitur purus viverra, pellentesque neque. Aliquam ornare, magna ut dictum mollis, nunc lorem iaculis nibh, eu consequat lectus urna euismod tortor.

Figure 2.1: Upper Columbia Chinook. Map of the general location of the ESU.

2.2 Recent trends

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Donec vitae ante quis dui egestas fringilla ac vitae justo. Pellentesque quis magna vel odio malesuada rutrum a volutpat nisl. Aliquam fermentum, urna eget tristique mattis, augue augue tristique ipsum, eget finibus nunc eros non nisi. Phasellus mattis hendrerit sapien, quis accumsan dui pretium eget. Nunc eleifend laoreet urna a luctus. Nulla vel sapien in nulla gravida tempus sit amet a metus. Vivamus porta condimentum tempus. Maecenas rhoncus elit id ultricies scelerisque. In gravida urna in ligula fringilla euismod. Curabitur efficitur porta libero ac fermentum. Cras fringilla et libero at posuere. Curabitur sodales dapibus elit a convallis.

Morbi iaculis eget augue eget facilisis. Etiam non orci dignissim, efficitur purus viverra, pellentesque neque. Aliquam ornare, magna ut dictum mollis, nunc lorem iaculis nibh, eu consequat lectus urna euismod tortor. Etiam ut felis nisl. Nunc quis euismod felis. Vestibulum gravida nisi mi, quis mollis velit ullamcorper non. Aliquam tempus fringilla bibendum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Fusce viverra nulla elementum libero mollis, quis cursus velit sagittis.

Figure 2.2: Upper Columbia Chinook. Log spawner count trends.

2.3 Population raw data

Morbi iaculis eget augue eget facilisis. Etiam non orci dignissim, efficitur purus viverra, pellentesque neque. Aliquam ornare, magna ut dictum mollis, nunc lorem iaculis nibh, eu consequat lectus urna euismod tortor. Etiam ut felis nisl. Nunc quis euismod felis. Vestibulum gravida nisi mi, quis mollis velit ullamcorper non. Aliquam tempus fringilla bibendum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Fusce viverra nulla elementum libero mollis, quis cursus velit sagittis.

2.3.1 Wenatchee R.

Table 2.1: Spawners and fracwild from Wenatchee R. (NMFS_POPID 102) for 2000 to 2018.

Year	Spawners	Fracwild
2000	1,250	0.39
2001	3,930	0.25
2002	1,595	0.45
2003	978	0.39
2004	1,605	0.63
2005	1,473	0.21
2006	939	0.33
2007	2,005	0.19
2008	2,139	0.17
2009	2,195	0.27
2010	1,759	0.31
2011	2,876	0.40
2012	2,511	0.37
2013	2,033	0.34
2014	2,219	0.57
2015	1,605	0.41
2016	985	0.64
2017	799	0.43
2018	1,127	0.24
** data file: ICUCchinook.csv mod date: Wed Aug 10 17:57:25 2022 -0600
* These spawner counts are from river redd surveys.
flextable

2.3.2 Entiat R.

Table 2.2: Spawners and fracwild from Entiat R. (NMFS_POPID 100) for 2000 to 2018.

Year	Spawners	Fracwild
2000	197	0.37
2001	323	0.70
2002	230	0.66
2003	262	0.76
2004	449	0.32
2005	263	0.49
2006	188	0.42
2007	468	0.44
2008	194	0.49
2009	368	0.49
2010	445	0.75
2011	508	0.75
2012	385	0.66
2013	192	0.79
2014	245	0.92
2015	509	0.82
2016	353	0.84
2017	101	0.62
2018	92	0.50
** data file: ICUCchinook.csv mod date: Wed Aug 10 17:57:25 2022 -0600
* These spawner counts are from river redd surveys.
flextable

2.3.3 Methow R.

Table 2.3: Spawners and fracwild from Methow R. (NMFS_POPID 101) for 2000 to 2019.

Year	Spawners	Fracwild
2000	979	0.12
2001	10,971	0.17
2002	2,636	0.13
2003	1,138	0.05
2004	1,497	0.33
2005	1,376	0.38
2006	1,748	0.19
2007	1,079	0.25
2008	1,002	0.30
2009	2,641	0.21
2010	2,364	0.25
2011	2,935	0.33
2012	1,280	0.20
2013	1,089	0.22
2014	2,063	0.25
2015	1,353	0.29
2016	697	0.46
2017	464	0.38
2018	500	0.53
2019	570	0.20
** data file: ICUCchinook.csv mod date: Wed Aug 10 17:57:25 2022 -0600
* These spawner counts are from river redd surveys.
flextable

Ansley, H. L. H., and C. D. Davis. 1981. “Migration and Standing Stock of Fishes Associated with Artificial and Natural Reefs on Georgia’s Outer Continental Shelf.” Brunswick, Georgia, USA.

Clark, W. G. 1993. “The Effect of Recruitment Variability on the Choice of a Target Level of Spawning Biomass Per Recruit.” In, 233246. Alaska Sea Grant College Program AKSG9302.

Collins, M. R., S. B. Van Sant, D. J. Schmidt, and G. R. Sedberry. 1996. “Age Validation, Movements, and Growth Rates of Tagged Gag (Mycteroperca Microlepis), Black Sea Bass (Centropristis Striata) and Red Porgy (Pagrus Pagrus).” In, edited by F. Arrequin-Sanchez, J. L. Munro, M. C. Balgos, and D. Pauly, 161–65. Makati City, Philippines: ICLARM (International Center for Living Aquatic Resources Management).

Deuel, D. G., and J. R. Clark. 1968. “The 1965 Salt-Water Angling Survey.”