FY 2003 Mainstem/Systemwide proposal 200309600
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 |
|---|---|
| 35044 Narrative | Narrative |
| 35044 Powerpoint Presentation | Powerpoint Presentation |
| 35044 Sponsor Response to the ISRP | Response |
| Sturgeon Overview | Powerpoint Presentation |
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Determine Effects of Contaminants on White Sturgeon Reproduction and Parental Transfer of Contaminants to Embryos in the Columbia River Basin |
| Proposal ID | 200309600 |
| Organization | Oregon State University (OSU) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
| Name | Molly A.H. Webb |
| Mailing address | Dept. Fish and Wildlife, 104 Nash Hall, Oregon State University Corvallis, OR 97331 |
| Phone / email | 5417372463 / webbm@onid.orst.edu |
| Manager authorizing this project | Molly A.H. Webb |
| Review cycle | Mainstem/Systemwide |
| Province / Subbasin | Mainstem/Systemwide / |
| Short description | Determine contaminant load in mature sturgeon and the effects of parental transfer of contaminants on non-specific immune factors and offspring fitness. Develop a nondestructive tool to monitor sturgeon contaminant load. |
| Target species | white sturgeon |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 45.67 | -121.88 | Below Bonneville Dam; unimpounded section of the Columbia River |
| 45.62 | -121.1 | Bonneville Reservoir, Columbia River |
| 45.62 | -121.15 | The Dalles Reservoir, Columbia River |
| 45.68 | -120.18 | John Day Reservoir, Columbia River |
| 45.93 | -119.28 | McNary Reservoir, Columbia River |
| 47.95 | -118.97 | Lake Roosevelt |
| 49.1 | -117.7 | Waneta Area, confluence of the Columbia and Pend d'Oreille Rivers |
| 48.68 | -116.3 | Rock Creek, Kootenai River |
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Sponsor-reported:
| RPA |
|---|
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
| Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
|---|
Section 2. Past accomplishments
| Year | Accomplishment |
|---|
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
| Project ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 198605000 | White Sturgeon Mitigation and Restoration in the Columbia and Snake Rivers | Collaborators in the collection of biological samples; this proposed work may be used to restore white sturgeon isolated within the geographic bounds of Project 198605000 |
| 198806400 | Kootenai River White Sturgeon Studies and Conservation Aquaculture | Collaborators in the collection of biological samples; this proposed work may be used to restore white sturgeon isolated within the geographic bounds of Project 198806400 |
| 198806500 | Kootenai River Fisheries Investigations | Collaborators in the collection of biological samples; this proposed work may be used to restore white sturgeon isolated within the geographic bounds of Project 198806400 |
| 199502700 | Assess Limiting Factors of the Lake Roosevelt White Sturgeon Population | Collaborators in the collection of biological samples; this proposed work may be used to restore white sturgeon isolated within the geographic bounds of Project 199502700 |
| 25052 | Sex Reversal in Hanford Reach Fall Chinook Salmon | Both projects examine the effects of pollution on fish reproduction in the Columbia River |
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2003 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 2003 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase
Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2003 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 2003 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Determine environmental contaminant concentrations and physiological measures indicative of contaminant exposure in adult white sturgeon in the Columbia River Basin | a. Collect paired gonad, blood, and liver from adult white sturgeon at 4-6 sites throughout the Columbia River Basin | Through each FY 2003, 2004, 2005 | $44,181 | |
| b. Analyze biological samples collected in Task 1a | Through each FY 2003, 2004, 2005 | $359,766 | Yes | |
| c. Determine if the environmental contaminant load in adult white sturgeon is correlated with reproductive development and differs among sites in the Columbia River Basin | Through each FY 2003, 2004, 2005 | $4,416 | ||
| 2. Determine if the environmental contaminant load in white sturgeon gonadal tissue may be assessed non-lethally | a. Determine if a correlation exists between contaminant concentrations in blood and gonadal tissues analyzed in Task 1b | Through each FY 2003, 2004, 2005 | $4,416 | |
| 3. Determine if parental transfer of environmental contaminants and non-specific immune factors to offspring occurs in wild white sturgeon spawned in aquaculture and conservation propagation programs in the Columbia River Basin | a. Determine environmental contaminant load in eggs, milt, and fertilized eggs from wild white sturgeon spawned in aquaculture and conservation propagation programs on the Columbia and Kootenai Rivers | Through each FY 2003, 2004, 2005 | $96,629 | Yes |
| b. Assess non-specific immunity of adult white sturgeon spawned in aquaculture and conservation propagation programs on the Columbia and Kootenai Rivers | Through each FY 2003, 2004, 2005 | $29,878 | Yes | |
| c. Determine measures of immune competence (lectin and lysozyme) in eggs from wild white sturgeon spawned in aquaculture and conservation propagation programs on the Columbia and Kootenai Rivers | Through each FY 2003, 2004, 2005 | $14,939 | Yes | |
| 4. Determine if parentally transferred environmental contaminant load in white sturgeon offspring reduces fitness | a. Examine cleavage patterns, embryo survival, rate of hatch, hatch success, mortality associated with initiation to feeding, and body deformities in the full-sibs from Task 3a | Through each FY 2003, 2004, 2005 | $33,433 | |
| 5. Assess survival and performance of embryonic, larval, and juvenile white sturgeon exposed to single contaminants | a. Develop technique for microinjection of individual contaminants into egg yolk of neurulated white sturgeon embryos | Through each FY 2003 | $64,718 | |
| b. Microinjection of single contaminants into egg yolk of neurulated white sturgeon embryos to assess survival and performance of embryos and larvae | Through each FY 2004, 2005 | $0 |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Determine environmental contaminant concentrations and physiological measures indicative of contaminant exposure in adult white sturgeon in the Columbia River Basin | 2004 | 2005 | $660,495 |
| 2. Determine if the environmental contaminant load in white sturgeon gonadal tissue may be assessed non-lethally | 2004 | 2005 | $10,274 |
| 3. Determine if parental transfer of environmental contaminants and non-specific immune factors to offspring occurs in wild white sturgeon spawned in conservation propagation programs in the Columbia River Basin | 2004 | 2005 | $265,819 |
| 4. Determine if parentally transferred environmental contaminant load in white sturgeon offspring reduces fitness | 2004 | 2005 | $36,776 |
| 5. Assess survival and performance of embryonic, larval, and juvenile white sturgeon exposed to single contaminants | 2004 | 2005 | $129,265 |
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
| FY 2004 | FY 2005 |
|---|---|
| $571,746 | $530,883 |
Section 8. Estimated budget summary
Itemized budget
| Item | Note | FY 2003 cost |
|---|---|---|
| Personnel | FTE: 2.32 | $83,085 |
| Fringe | $30,476 | |
| Supplies | includes procurement for heavy metal analysis from Frontier Geosciences | $61,396 |
| Travel | $2,000 | |
| Indirect | (41.5%) | $102,859 |
| Subcontractor | Axys Analytical Services (41.5% indirect on the first $25,000) | $310,574 |
| Subcontractor | Portland State University | $20,895 |
| Subcontractor | USGS-Cook (41.5% indirect on the first $25,000) | $34,442 |
| Other | Student Assistance (tuition) | $6,649 |
| $652,376 | ||
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2003 cost | $652,376 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2003 budget request | $652,376 |
| FY 2003 forecast from 2002 | $0 |
| % change from forecast | 0.0% |
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| Washington Deparment of Fish and Wildlife | boat and personnel to collect samples from adults below Bonneville Dam, in Bonneville Reservoir, and in McNary Reservoir | $70,290 | in-kind |
| Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife | boat and personnel to collect samples from adults in Bonneville Reservoir (FY 2003, The Dalles Reservoir (FY 2005), and John Day Reservoir (FY2004) | $37,950 | in-kind |
| Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission | personnel and supplies to collect samples from adults in McNary Reservoir | $41,250 | in-kind |
| Spokane Tribe | boat, personnel, and supplies to collect samples from adults in Lake Roosevelt | $36,500 | in-kind |
| B.C. Ministry of Environment | boat, personnel, and supplies to collect samples from adults in the Waneta Area | $56,100 | in-kind |
| Kootenai Tribe | boat, personnel, and supplies to collect samples from adults in the Kootenai River | $57,750 | in-kind |
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
Aug 2, 2002
Comment:
A response is needed. This is a research project to test the hypothesis that contaminant loading, particularly of reproductive tissue, is a major factor in poor recruitment of white sturgeon in the Columbia River basin. If it is, then mitigative measures could be taken to lessen contaminant loading of the environment, with benefits to recruitment of white sturgeon. The project would sample adult white sturgeon at several sites in the basin ranging from the tributaries (e.g., Kootenai River) to the lower mainstem (in collaboration with other studies) and assay them for a range of potential contaminants and contaminant-indicating physiological parameters. A non-invasive method of assay would be developed (most likely a blood analysis) although initial assays would be destructive. Eggs and sperm would also be assayed to quantify transfer of contaminants and parentally derived immune factors (that might be lower from contaminated adults) to young. The developmental survival and fitness of young would be determined and related to parental contaminant load. Exposures of fish in the laboratory to selected contaminants would establish dose-response relationships for uptake and certain other effects.The proposal is exhaustively thorough in both background and tasks/methods, with a long list of cited references. The proposal is clearly based on sound contaminant science. Consistency with the Council's Fish and Wildlife Program is well demonstrated, as is relevance to regional programs such as the Action Agencies' Implementation Plan and the Mainstem/Systemwide program summary for white sturgeon. There are clearly defined objectives with anticipated outcomes, and appropriate tasks and methods for each. The project is presented as a monitoring and evaluation project, so no explicit discussion of that ISRP criterion is given (although it would have been helpful).
The ISRP has, however, a question about the benefit to fish and wildlife, which should be addressed in a response. The proposal does not persuasively justify the extensive amount of proposed work based on the geographic distribution of contaminants and problems with white sturgeon recruitment. The ISRP understands that recruitment is good in the lower Columbia River, is moderate to annually variable in the middle river (e.g., John Day pool) and is poor to non-existent in the Priest Rapids pool. In addition, recruitment in the Kootenai River is also poor to non-existent. One might suspect that the contaminant loading of the Columbia River basin would be the reverse, that is, more contaminants in the lower river than in the upper reaches (with the exception of localized contaminant sources in headwaters affected by industries such as mining). The proposal usually does not indicate location when it cites literature as demonstration of contamination (with the exception of Bonneville pool). For this research to be funded as more than an exploratory sampling, the proposal needs to give more convincing evidence from existing literature that contamination and white sturgeon recruitment problems are geographically linked or that there is another persuasive rationale.
The ISRP also questions whether extant contaminant levels cited are within the ranges believed to be biologically significant (for any species). That is, is there evidence that such levels in the lower river actually can lead to reduction of population output in biomass? Such evidence should be provided in a response. Also, a response should discuss how we can know that the site the fish is captured and the toxin locations are the same (sturgeon move around a lot).
A key issue for management is: What can we do about positive results? If we hold the line on further contamination, will nature heal this problem? Should we be concentrating on hot spot removal (Superfund)? Could contaminated sediments used by sturgeon be buried by clean sediment? These questions are not answerable at this time without results from the research, but should guide the perspective of the study.
This project was not selected by the Action Agency/NMFS RME Work Group for further examination.
Comment:
The obvious, easily recognized benefit is knowledge of parental transfer, which may assist in eventual broodstock selection. Less obvious is what to do about contaminants in general. Although the hydropower system has exacerbated the contaminant problem, it is not solely responsible. Significant cost share from contaminant sources would seem appropriate. The Water Quality Plan Workgroup provided the following comments: • The Water Quality Planning Group recognizes the long term nature of fish research projects involving contaminants and their effect on fish. However, the group could not reach a consensus recommendation on this project. Following are a range of comments provided by group members. • Projects involving toxics and effects on fish often require extensive time and effort. This fact alone suggests that delaying the initiation of projects such as this can only be detrimental, i.e., the longer these projects are deferred, the longer this type of information will be unavailable to the region and salmon recovery efforts. • Based on results recently released by EPA regarding fish tissue contamination (EPA Columbia River Basin Fish Contamination Survey, July 2002), the information these projects can provide is especially valuable to the protection of both fish and human health. As the EPA results indicate, contaminants such as dioxin, PCB's, DDT, arsenic, and mercury were present in the tissues of both resident and anadromous fish, with higher concentrations occurring in bottom feeding resident fish, such as sturgeon. Surveys have indicated that average fish consumption by CRITFC member tribes is nine times greater than that of the average American. Studies involving resident fish and contaminants existing in the Columbia River Basin from past activities (#35044) would not only be pertinent, but also timely. This is a high priority project. • Projects investigating the fate and biological effects of current-use pesticides and other toxic chemicals found in the environment will be addressed by the Water Quality Planning Group in the next calendar year. The immediate emphases of this group are water temperature and total dissolved gas. The group believes it is necessary that topics regarding toxic materials be pursued on a comprehensive and integrated regional basis. Funding this proposal at this time might preclude the ability to initiate more appropriate research on this topic after regional prioritization is established. This is a do not fund. • The results of the EPA Columbia River Basin Fish Contamination Survey (July 2002) indicates that contaminants are indeed a problem. This study would provide valuable information on how those contaminants are affecting white sturgeon survival. Since sturgeon are not threatened or endangered at present, this study has less immediate need but is important work that should be considered a recommended action. • The project does address some of the technical needs and critical uncertainties identified in the Mainstem and Systemwide Province Water Quality Summary. • Some participants of the Water Quality Planning Group expressed concern for the implied funding source for this project, suggesting that another avenue of funding would be more appropriate for a toxic material problem.Comment:
Fundable. We agree with CBFWA's designation of the project as high priority. This is a research project to test the hypothesis that contaminant loading, particularly of reproductive tissue, is a major factor in poor recruitment of white sturgeon in the Columbia River basin. If it is, then mitigative measures could be taken to lessen contaminant loading of the environment, with benefits to recruitment of white sturgeon. The project would sample adult white sturgeon at several sites in the basin ranging from the tributaries (e.g., Kootenai River) to the lower mainstem (in collaboration with other studies) and assay them for a range of potential contaminants and contaminant-indicating physiological parameters. A non-invasive method of assay would be developed (most likely a blood analysis) although initial assays would be destructive. Eggs and sperm would also be assayed to quantify transfer of contaminants and parentally derived immune factors (that might be lower from contaminated adults) to young. The developmental survival and fitness of young would be determined and related to parental contaminant load. Exposures of fish in the laboratory to selected contaminants would establish dose-response relationships for uptake and certain other effects.The proposal is exhaustively thorough in both background and tasks/methods, with a long list of cited references. The proposal is clearly based on sound contaminant science. Consistency with the Council's Fish and Wildlife Program is well demonstrated, as is relevance to regional programs such as the Action Agencies' Implementation Plan and the Mainstem/Systemwide program summary for white sturgeon. There are clearly defined objectives with anticipated outcomes, and appropriate tasks and methods for each. The project is presented as a monitoring and evaluation project, so no explicit discussion of that ISRP criterion is given (although it would have been helpful).
The response adequately and persuasively explained the distribution of contaminant sources in the basin and the resulting implications for white sturgeon and for the research that is proposed. The potential biological significance of contaminant levels was well presented. Contaminants remain high on the list of potential contributors to poor recruitment of white sturgeon and deserve to receive the attention proposed in this study.
A key issue for management remains: What can we do about positive results? If we hold the line on further contamination, will nature heal this problem? Should we be concentrating on hot spot removal (Superfund)? Could contaminated sediments used by sturgeon be buried by clean sediment? These questions are not answerable at this time without results from the research, but should guide the perspective of the study.
Comment:
Statement of Potential Biological BenefitComments
Not Reviewed
Already ESA Required?
Biop?
No
Comment:
Category:3. Other projects not recommended by staff
Comments: