FY 2000 proposal 199801001

Additional documents

TitleType
199801001 Narrative Narrative
199801001 Sponsor Response to the ISRP Response

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal titleGrande Ronde Basin Spring Chinook Captive Broodstock Program
Proposal ID199801001
OrganizationOregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
NameRichard W. Carmichael
Mailing addressE.O.U., Inlow Hall #211, 1410 "L" Avenue La Grande, OR 97850
Phone / email5419623777 / odfw2@eou.edu
Manager authorizing this project
Review cycleFY 2000
Province / SubbasinBlue Mountain / Grande Ronde
Short descriptionImplement captive broodstock programs and associated research, monitoring, evaluation, and fish health for spring chinook salmon populations in Catherine Creek, upper Grande Ronde and Lostine rivers, to conserve genetic diversity and assist in recovery.
Target speciesSpring Chinook Salmon
Project location
LatitudeLongitudeDescription
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Sponsor-reported:

RPA

Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:

Reviewing agencyAction #BiOp AgencyDescription

Section 2. Past accomplishments

YearAccomplishment
1995 Collected 1994 brood juveniles from Catherine Creek, Grande Ronde and Lostine rivers.
1996 Completed long-term management plan for captive broodstock program and obtained an ESA permit.
1996 Collected 1995 brood juveniles from Catherine Creek and the Lostine River.
1996 Cryopreserved semen from mature 1994 brood males.
1997 Completed designs for new facilities for captive brood at Bonneville Fish Hatchery and Manchester Marine Lab. Completed NPPC review process and received approval for funding and construction. Began construction.
1997 Transferred 1995 brood juveniles and cryopreserved semen from mature 1994 and 1995 brood males.
1997 Collected 1996 brood juveniles from Catherine Creek, the Grande Ronde and Lostine rivers.
1997 Began construction of Bonneville and Manchester Captive Broodstock facilities.
1998 Collected 1997 brood juveniles from Catherine Creek, the Grande Ronde and Lostine rivers. Transferred 1996 brood to Bonneville and Manchester Hatcheries.
1998 Sorted mature females and males at Bonneville and Manchester Hatcheries, and spawned 119, 1994 and one, 1995 brood females. Transferred embryos to Irrigon Hatchery for incubation.
1998 Completed construction of Bonneville and Manchester Captive Broodstock facilities.

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Project IDTitleDescription
9202604 Early Life History of Spring Chinook Salmon in the Grande Ronde Basin. We utilize migration timing information from this project to determine when to collect juveniles for captive broodstock. Life history information will also be used to access the success of supplementation programs and smolt migration success.
8805301 NE Oregon Hatcheries - ODFW, CTUIR, and NPT. Captive broodstock program will be directly integrated into the NE Oregon Hatcheries program as it will be providing the broodstock and eggs that will be utilized for NEOH.
8905302 NE Oregon Hatcheries - ODFW, CTUIR, and NPT. Captive broodstock program will be directly integrated into the NE Oregon Hatcheries program as it will be providing the broodstock and eggs that will be utilitzed for NEOH.
5520700 Captive Broodstock Artificial Propagation This is the NPT funding for cooperative evaluation of the Grande Ronde Spring Chinook Captive Broodstock Program.
8909600 Genetic Monitoring and Evaluation of Snake River Salmon and Steelhead. This project provides samples for the genetics montoring program.
Fish Passage Center Smolt Montoring Program - Migration Characteristics During the summer, we PIT-tag parr in Catherine Creek, and the Lostine and Grande Ronde rivers. We collect parr for the captive broodstock when parr PIT-tagging occurs. This project also provides personnel and information to improve efficiencies.
9606700 Captive Broodstock Program - Manchester Marine Lab This is a NMFS project that rears Grande Ronde Captive Broodstock as a part of the program.
Spring Chinook Endemic Broodstock Development This captive broodstock program is integrated with the Grande Ronde Endemic program and will utilize the adult collection facilities to monitor returns and survival of captive broodstock produced returns.
Lower Snake River Compensation Plan The captive broodstock project is providing embryos for use in the LSRCP supplementation program. Production and release of captive brood progeny is funded under the LSRCP.
20512 Grande Ronde River Subbasin
9801001 Grande Ronde Basin Spring Chinook Captive Broodstock Program

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2000 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase

Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2000 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase

Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2000 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase

Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2000 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget
ItemNoteFY 2000 cost
Personnel $234,000
Fringe $89,176
Supplies $83,025
Operating $50,000
PIT tags 1700 $4,930
Travel $18,400
Indirect $166,566
$646,097
Total estimated budget
Total FY 2000 cost$646,097
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds$0
Total FY 2000 budget request$646,097
FY 2000 forecast from 1999$0
% change from forecast0.0%
Cost sharing
OrganizationItem or service providedAmountCash or in-kind
Other budget explanation

Schedule Constraints: None


Reviews and recommendations

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

Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Jun 15, 1999

Comment:

Recommendation: Fund. See proposals 9800702, 9800703 and 9801006.

Comments: This proposal is from ODFW to continue the implementation and evaluation of the captive broodstock program for spring chinook in the Grande Ronde basin. It is a focused proposal with a good description of the experimental protocol and the reasoning behind it. This project is listed under implementation, but it appears to be more closely associated with research and monitoring. This is a very comprehensive monitoring program that will assess how different hatchery and broodstock protocols affect survival to spawning. Monitoring of disease and infectious agents in the hatchery and of effectiveness of therapeutic treatments are important components of the program. The program includes data that will be needed to evaluate the spring chinook program in the Grande Ronde Basin.

The proposal also has some weaknesses. The objectives listed on page 16 are more tasks than objectives; the objectives listed in the abstract are better. The project would be strengthened by more direct reference to these objectives and the desired outcomes they represent, rather than to "process." The methods are reasonable, but statistical protocols are not given.

In addition, the ISRP noted that the reliance on captive broodstock to preserve stock can be regarded only as a short-term and temporary solution to the threat of extinction of these salmon stocks. Captive broodstock programs offer many threats, including domestication, poor breeding success or survival, increased disease sensitivity. It also is extremely costly and seems intractable as a tool for preserving all Basin strains. It would be hard to imagine a species with a more complicated life history, one more difficult to replicate in culture, than those of anadromous Pacific salmon. To retain these animals in culture is likely to alter selective pressures and to lose some of the coadapted genomes of wild fish, no matter how much hatcheries become more natural. It is quite possible that small wild populations are more viable in the wild than they would be as captive brood taken from the wild. Recent studies and reviews in conservation biology are recommending that captive broodstock be a last-resort strategy and that they follow only after careful field studies and a determination that preferable alternatives are not available and that captive breeding is necessary for short-term survival. Even though the proposal acknowledges that threats to adult survival, particularly habitat and passage, must be solved for the broodstock programs to be successful conservation or mitigation tools, to fund these captive broodstock programs without concomitant emphasis on solving the root problems seems financially foolish and futile.


Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Aug 20, 1999

Comment:


Recommendation:
Date:
Aug 20, 1999

Comment:

Criteria all: Met? Yes -
Recommendation:
Date:
Aug 20, 1999

Comment:

Potential duplicative efforts were reduced and/or coordination was improved. Costs reduced as a result of improved efficiencies.
Recommendation:
Fund at current levels
Date:
Mar 1, 2000

Comment:

(d) captive propagation - (Projects 9009300, 9107200, 9204000, 9305600, 9606700, 9801001, and 9801006 - various sponsors)

Issue: 1) Has NMFS developed a prioritization schedule for captive brood projects as previously requested by the Council, and; 2) if the answer is yes, does the Council find the interim standards for use of captive brood strategies adequately responsive to the Council's concerns that these projects are costly, and the feasibility of the technology is unproven?

Past Council Treatment: In its Fiscal Year 1998 and Fiscal Year 1999 recommendations, the Council expressed several categorical concerns with the captive broodstock projects being proposed for funding: (1) the projects are expensive, (2) they appear to be proliferating, (3) the feasibility of the technology had not been adequately reviewed, and, (4) an underlying question related to the question of whether these projects are primarily "ESA projects" or projects that are consistent with and part of the program funded by Bonneville. In the end, the Council recommended that existing captive broodstock programs be funded, but it called upon NMFS to work with the other anadromous fish managers to develop a set of interim standards for the application of captive broodstock technology. The Council advised that its continued funding support for the NMFS systemwide project was contingent on a set of acceptable standards being developed. The Council also stated that it would not recommend funding for any new captive broodstock projects absent an emergency, without those standards. The Council also stated its intention to require captive broodstock projects to follow the interim 3-step review process for artificial production projects. The Council has also asked that NMFS prioritize captive broodstock projects and provide that schedule to the Council to assist in the review of the budget proposals.

In February of this year, NMFS submitted the interim standards report requested by the Council. The region is using these interim standards as temporary guidance in discussions about captive propagation. The standards were incorporated into the guidelines and performance standards developed in the preservation/conservation purpose of artificial production under the APR process, and are, therefore, consistent with the principles, policies, and purposes as described in the report and recommendations.

Council Recommendation: To date, the Council has not received a prioritization of likely target populations and intervention programs to form a basis for programmatic and budget planning. Therefore, funding levels for existing programs should be held at current levels pending that prioritization. If and when the prioritization is provided, a review of these captive brood programs for consistency with APR report policies and standards must be conducted before additional funds are allocated to these programs or new programs. The Council recommends that projects 9009300, 9107200, 9204000, 9305600, 9606700, 9801001 and 9801006 be funded with the following conditions:


Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Mar 1, 2000

Comment:

[Decision made in 9-22-99 Council Meeting]; Funding level determination for BPA
REVIEW:
NW Power and Conservation Council's FY 2006 Project Funding Review
Funding category:
expense
Date:
May 2005
FY05 NPCC start of year:FY06 NPCC staff preliminary:FY06 NPCC July draft start of year:
$723,718 $723,718 $723,718

Sponsor comments: See comment at Council's website