FY 2002 Columbia Plateau proposal 200203000
Contents
Section 1. General administrative information
Section 2. Past accomplishments
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
Section 4. Budgets for planning/design phase
Section 5. Budgets for construction/implementation phase
Section 6. Budgets for operations/maintenance phase
Section 7. Budgets for monitoring/evaluation phase
Section 8. Budget summary
Reviews and Recommendations
Additional documents
| Title | Type |
|---|---|
| 25059 Narrative | Narrative |
| 25059 Sponsor Response to the ISRP | Response |
| Columbia Plateau: Umatilla Subbasin Map with BPA Fish & Wildlife Projects | Subbasin Map |
| Columbia Plateau: Umatilla Subbasin Map with BPA Fish & Wildlife Projects | Subbasin Map |
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Develop Progeny Marker for Salmonids to Evaluate Supplementation |
| Proposal ID | 200203000 |
| Organization | Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation - DNR Fisheries (CTUIR) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
| Name | Craig Contor |
| Mailing address | P.O. Box 638 Pendleton, OR 97801 |
| Phone / email | 5419662377 / craigcontor@ctuir.com |
| Manager authorizing this project | Gary A. James |
| Review cycle | Columbia Plateau |
| Province / Subbasin | Columbia Plateau / Umatilla |
| Short description | A chemical progeny mark would be developed and tested to evaluate natural reproductive success of supplemented steelhead . The mark would be administered to female parents and would be detectable in the otolith of their progeny. |
| Target species | Middle Columbia ESU Summer Steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 45.9144 | -119.3384 | This research will take place in a university laboratory. However, after development of the progeny mark, it will be applied in the Umatilla Basin by the CTUIR steelhead supplementation program. This is the location of mouth of the Umatilla River. |
| 45.894 | -119.3254 | The Three Mile Dam adult holding/spawning facility is located on the lower Umatilla River at approximately RM 4. After development of the progeny marker, upmigrating female steelhead would be captured and marked at this location. |
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Sponsor-reported:
| RPA |
|---|
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
| Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| NMFS | Action 184 | NMFS | The Action Agencies and NMFS shall work within regional prioritization and congressional appropriation processes to establish and provide the appropriate level of FCRPS funding for a hatchery research, monitoring, and evaluation program consisting of studies to determine whether hatchery reforms reduce the risk of extinction for Columbia River basin salmonids and whether conservation hatcheries contribute to recovery. |
| NMFS/BPA | Action 184 | NMFS | The Action Agencies and NMFS shall work within regional prioritization and congressional appropriation processes to establish and provide the appropriate level of FCRPS funding for a hatchery research, monitoring, and evaluation program consisting of studies to determine whether hatchery reforms reduce the risk of extinction for Columbia River basin salmonids and whether conservation hatcheries contribute to recovery. |
Section 2. Past accomplishments
| Year | Accomplishment |
|---|---|
| This is a newly proposed project |
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
| Project ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 8903500 | Umatilla Hatchery O&M | The marker will be used as a tool to help evaluate the success of the Umatilla Hatchery program. |
| 198343500 | Umatilla Hatchery Satellite Facilities O&M | The marker will be used as a tool to help evaluate the success of the Umatilla Hatchery program |
| 9000500 | Umatilla Hatchery M&E | The marker will be used as a tool to help evaluate the success of the Umatilla Hatchery program |
| 8802200 | Umatilla Fish Passage Operations | The Umatilla River Fish Passage project has facilities necessary to capture and mark hatchery females with the progeny marker as they migrate up river over Three Mile Dam. |
| 9000501 | Umatilla Natural Production M&E | The Umatilla Natural Production project will be the primary user of marker when developed and is currently set up to monitor natural production, including sampling outmigrating salmonids. |
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2002 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase
Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2002 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Obj. 1 - Determine chemical composition and delivery medium of marker to be tested on maturing females. (Starts in FY2002) | Task 1a - Define the best chemical composition to be used to allow strontium uptake by developing ova. | 1 | $38,623 | |
| Task 1b - Conduct initial trials on a small number of fish to test the physiological effects of the proposed markers on maturing females and developing embyros. | 1 | $96,558 | Yes | |
| Obj. 2 - Test new marker on hatchery-raised, adult, female steelhead to determine whether it can be incorporated into the otoliths of their progeny. (Starts in FY2003) | Task 2a - Mark maturing female fish with three different marker concentrations and rear their progeny. | 3 | $0 | Yes |
| Task 2b - Artificially spawn marked and control females and rear progeny. | 3 | $0 | Yes | |
| Task 2c - Extract otoliths from progeny and prepare samples for elemental analysis. | 3 | $0 | ||
| Task 2d - Analyze Sr:Ca ratio within the primordia and freshwater growth regions of each otolith suing electron microprobe. | 3 | $0 | Yes | |
| Obj. 3 - Analyze data gathered from the experimental trials and report results to BPA and the scientific community. (Starts in FY2002) | Task 3a - Statistically analyze the data obtained from the electron microprobe sampling to determine whether the marker was effective. | 3 | $4,828 | Yes |
| Task 3b - Report data to BPA and scientific community. | 3 | $9,656 |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| Obj. 2 - Test new marker on hatchery-raised, adult, female steelhead to determine whether it can be incorporated into the otoliths of their progeny. (Starts in FY2003) | 2003 | 2004 | $310,145 |
| Obj. 3 - Analyze data gathered from the experimental trials and report results to BPA and the scientific community. (Starts in FY2002) | 2003 | 2004 | $40,667 |
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase
| FY 2003 | FY 2004 |
|---|---|
| $152,151 | $198,661 |
Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2002 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase
Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2002 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
Section 8. Estimated budget summary
Itemized budget
| Item | Note | FY 2002 cost |
|---|---|---|
| Personnel | FTE: 0.88 | $35,037 |
| Fringe | 35% Fringe for FTE's | $12,263 |
| Supplies | $1,000 | |
| Travel | $1,068 | |
| Indirect | $16,785 | |
| Capital | Computer | $2,000 |
| Subcontractor | Research contracted to university | $81,512 |
| $149,665 | ||
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2002 cost | $149,665 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2002 budget request | $149,665 |
| FY 2002 forecast from 2001 | $0 |
| % change from forecast | 0.0% |
Reason for change in estimated budget
N/A - newly proposed project
Reason for change in scope
N/A - newly proposed project
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|
Other budget explanation
Some aspects of this research will be subcontracted to a college such as the University of Idaho, Oregon State University or Washington State University. Contractor will be selected based on the availablity of facilities for spawning and rearing fish, and expertise in this field of research.
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Fundable only if response is adequate
Jun 15, 2001
Comment:
Fundable, but a response is needed that summarizes previous studies showing that injected strontium or other materials in an adult appears in smolts. This is a proposal to test a method (artificially induced strontium marks on bony structures) for marking tissue of developing salmon embryos. The proposal is to test the technique as a tool for identifying offspring of adult females injected with strontium. If the technique is found to be useful, it could be used to help understand the fate of offspring from hatchery fish spawning in nature.
There is more relevant literature than the authors cite (not that they needed everything). Exotic markers such as Europium have also been used (very small quantities, but easily detected as anomalies in the scale or otolith focus; no need for Ca and a ratio). There is high likelihood for success.
The proposal needs to better demonstrate that exploratory work by them or someone else indicates that the injection of strontium in the adult will transfer to the eggs during maturation and be detectable in juveniles at smolt size. The whole body immersion in the marine environment does tag the egg and early otolith with strontium, but whether the injections into an upstream migrating adult will work is another matter. A brief summary of the evidence in the literature references appended to the proposal would be helpful before committing to a 3-year research effort. This summary will make the proposal more complete and not dependent on attachments.
Comment:
This project addresses NMFS RPA 184. If this work is successful the technique could be a useful management tool for evaluation programs. Cost share will consist of in-kind from the CTUIR. This project was viewed as having merit since the supplementation project has been ongoing for a number of years. Pending the results, this may be especially valuable due to universal applications.Comment:
Fundable. The response confirmed that the procedure they proposed (injecting strontium into females for it to show up in progeny) has not been done before even in laboratory tests. If the method proves useful, the ISRP expects the next step will be a proposal to apply the method in an evaluation of supplementation. The important question concerns the impact on fitness of native populations of interbreeding with hatchery fish. This is a difficult problem that will require creative thinking, especially to identify a credible control.Comment:
Statement of Potential Biological Benefit to ESUIf successful, project would allow determination of hatchery fish spawning rates in the Umatilla subbasin, by marking hatchery fish with a chemical marker. This would provide a method to assess wild population status more robustly (resolving an important uncertainty.) See comments.
Comments
IF this works (see ISRP comments), this has the potential to be a useful tool, if two conditions are met: 1) there should be some benefit to this method over molecular methods -- molecular data can provide more information than this method, and those techniques are already developed. Unless this proposed method is cheaper, easier, etc., it would be better to focus on those molecular techniques. Priority should not be given to this project until some benefit is demonstrated. 2) ALL hatchery fish must be marked, or this method will not produce useful results.
Already ESA Req? no
Biop? yes
Comment:
The proposal should include additional out-year costs assuming development of the marker is successful. In the later years, the tribe would want to apply the marker to its propagation program and collect juvenile fish to test for the marker. The proposal only addresses a marker for juvenile progeny of naturally spawning, hatchery-origin fish. A progeny marker should be able to measure the return of that progeny as an adult, after its rearing time in the ocean. This would be a better measure of the success of a hatchery-origin fish spawning in the wild. The proposal should be expanded to seek chemical marks that could be measured throughout the subsequent adult life stage. Strontium, while providing a marker for juvenile progeny, may not work to distinguish fish at the later adult stage after ocean rearing.Comment:
Develop a progeny marker to evaluate supplementation, Project 25059 The CTUIR proposes a research project to develop a chemical marker to distinguish hatchery fish from wild populations. The project has received support from NMFS as addressing RPA 184, with two conditions 1) that there is a benefit to this method over a molecular method and 2) that all hatchery fish are marked. Bonneville gave the proposal a Category A funding designation.
Staff Recommendation: Though the Council has tended to disfavor research prior to subbasin planning, staff believes like NMFS and Bonneville that the project could provide a useful tool for distinguishing hatchery fish from wild populations. The project has relatively low costs and would be worthy of Council support.
Budget effect on base program (Project 25059):
| FY 2002 | FY 2003 | FY 2004 |
|---|---|---|
| Increase $149,665 | Increase $152,151 | Increase $198,661 |
Comment:
Comment:
Check accruals and billings for 03. Indirect increases and COLA for 04 and 05. Will be an aspect of the study design for M&E plan. Study to complete in 05, delay in project will cause shift for one year.Comment:
In FY 04 CTUIR is seeking an increase of $4,354 to cover the 2003 unfunded Indirect Rate increase. The previous year budget was submitted with a 34% Indirect Rate because the Department of Interior hadn't officially issued a new approved rate for BPA to consider. Unfunded 2003 Indirect Rate Increase = $4,354.NW Power and Conservation Council's FY 2006 Project Funding Review
expense
May 2005
| FY05 NPCC start of year: | FY06 NPCC staff preliminary: | FY06 NPCC July draft start of year: |
| $198,661 | $198,661 | $198,661 |
Sponsor comments: See comment at Council's website