FY 2002 Columbia Plateau proposal 199000500

Section 1. Administrative

Project location

Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Section 2. Past accomplishments

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget

Outyear objectives-based budget

Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase

Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase

Task-based budget

Outyear objectives-based budget

Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase

Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase

Task-based budget

Outyear objectives-based budget

Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase

Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Task-based budget

Outyear objectives-based budget

Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget

Total estimated budget

Reason for change in estimated budget

The most significant change in cost is from the temporary reduction of subyearling fall chinook production from 2.7 million to 600 thousand fish at Umatilla Hatchery. The National Marine Fisheries Service mandates 100% wire tagging of all fall chinook produced at Umatilla Hatchery, NMFS Biological Opinion, Section 7 consultation.

Cost sharing

Reviews and recommendations

This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.

Comment:

Fundable if adequate responses are given to ISRP concerns. There is a need for hatchery monitoring and evaluation. However, the project should be redirected to address more pressing, current issues. The proposal produces the usual hatchery release data, smolt numbers, eggs, health checks, etc., which is required, but what of the real goal, i.e., adult returns and catch? The HGMP seems thorough however, but with conflicting goals. Note that the system produces about 50,000 wild smolts (is that near capacity?) while 150,000 hatchery steelhead smolts are released, yet the return is reported to be comprised of 25% hatchery fish. (0.08 to 0.9%, 1991 to 1995), from 110 wild and 15 hatchery broodstock (why the latter?). In other words, the returns are only just above replacement for hatchery recruitment in some years. Would it have been better to let the wild broodstock spawn naturally?

The use of oxygen has been demonstrated to increase the carrying capacity of raceways sufficiently that more returning adults will result per unit of water used. This is particularly important in the Umatilla Hatchery where the water supply is only 1/3 of what was planned for the facility. Given the experience with the use of oxygen here and elsewhere it is now time to move on to address other questions. A summary report and review of literature should be published. The SRT (1999) brought forward some guidelines for research to resolve questions about the technology and management of hatcheries. One crucial problem the SRT identified was the absence of measurement of the full contribution of individual hatcheries to fisheries and to spawning escapement. A full accounting for removals by any and all sources of mortality is needed. They also pointed out the need for more information on relative return rates of fish released at different times and or sizes, particularly in the context of the timing and size of smolts produced in the wild. More information is needed on effects of planted fish on smolts already in the stream, both as to their migratory behavior and survival. This proposal should demonstrate close coordination with # 199000501, Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation Project.

The response should outline a process for obtaining the new kinds of data suggested by the ISRP, or a process for redirecting the emphasis of the studies. The oxygen study, if any, should be correlated with the Willamette Michigan Raceway studies.

Comment:

Comment:

Investigators in the Tucannon have concluded that supplementation does not work, and this study shows that survival of hatchery fish relative to wild is low. The latter may also degrade natural production. How do these results influence the goals and objectives of this program?

Comment:

Comments
Potential for also contributing to RPA 182 (assessing reproductive success of hatchery fish). MULTIPLE refers to MCR SH and MCR SCH; SR FC and SSCH

Already ESA Req? NO

Biop? NO

Comment:

Comment:

ISRP" Disagree - Not Fundable" recommendation for the Umatilla Fish Hatchery Monitoring and Evaluation - Project 199000500.

Evaluate juvenile rearing, adult survival, stock life history, straying, fish health and sport fishing and catch contribution for salmon and steelhead reared in oxygen supplemented and standard raceways at Umatilla Hatchery.

Staff recommendation: A determination is needed to ensure that the stated purpose for the artificial production initiative and specific goal and objectives can be assessed under the current study designs. This determination needs to be completed prior to future commitment to the program and Council staff suggests that this be conducted by the ISRP. This review needs to address not only the overarching goal of the assessment, but also the specific questions in the ISRP review (ISRP Document 2001-8). In addition the long-term outcome from the evaluation as it relates to the artificial production initiative being monitored needs to be addressed. Budget reflects the anticipation of the project Implementation and out-year-funding dependant on the review.

Council staff and ISRP will determine an approach to conduct an additional review. This will most likely will involve an additional submittal and may involve ISRP and sponsor interaction via teleconference.

Budget effect on base program (Project 199000500):

Comment:

Comment:

Comment:

Sponsor comments: See comment at Council's website