Return to Proposal Finder FY 2000 Proposal 199305600

Proposal Table of Contents

Additional Documents

Section 1. General Administrative information
Section 2. Past accomplishments
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
Section 4. Objectives, tasks and schedules
Section 5. Budget
Section 6. References
Section 7. Abstract

Reviews and Recommendations
Title Type File Size File Date


Section 1. General Administrative Information

Title of Project Proposal Assessment of Captive Broodstock Technology
BPA Project Proposal Number 199305600
Business name of agency, institution,
or organization requesting funding
National Marine Fisheries Service
Business acronym (if appropriate) NMFS
 

Proposal contact person or principal investigator

Name Dr. Penny Swanson
Mailing Address NFSC - 2725 Montlake Blvd. East
City, State, Zip Seattle, WA 98112
Phone 2068603282
Fax 2068603267
E-mail penny.swanson@noaa.gov
 
Manager of program authorizing this project
 
Review Cycle FY 2000
Province Mainstem/Systemwide
Subbasin Systemwide
 
Short Description Improve effectiveness and assess risks of captive broodstock programs as a tool for recovery of depleted salmon stocks
Target Species Pacific salmon Oncorhynchus sp.


Project Location

[No information]


Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Sponsor-Reported Relevant RPAs

Sponsor listed no RPAs for this project proposal

Relevant RPAs based upon NMFS & BPA Review

NMFS and BPA did not associate any reasonable and prudent alternatives with this project proposal


NPPC Program Measure Number(s) which this project addresses: Measure 7.4D.1 in the NPPC F & W Program,
FWS/NMFS Biological Opinion Number(s) which this project addresses: Steelhead Biop
Other Planning Document References Task 4.1.c in the NMFS Proposed Snake River Recovery Plan


CBFWA-Generated Information

Database Administrator notes on the history of this proposal form: None
Type of Project (assigned by CBFWA Analysts): anadromous


Section 2. Past Accomplishments

Year Accomplishment
1994 Compared reproductive performance of sockeye salmon reared in either fresh or salt water.
1994 Compared effectiveness of biodegradeable and nonbiodegradable GnRH implants for induction of ovulation and spermiation in sockeye salmon
1993 Examined the relationship between body fat levels and early male maturity in spring chinook salmon
1995 Examined independent and interactive effects of growth rate and body fat levels on onset of maturity in male spring chinook salmon
1997 Examine relationship between growth rate or ration level on onset of age of maturity in male spring chinook salmon
1994 Determine critical period of olfatory imprinting in sockeye and spring chinook salmon
1994 Tested improved broodstock diets for sockeye salmon
1995 Tested various dietary lipid levels for effects on reproductive performance in sockeye salmon
1996 Developed/validated bioencapsulation procedures to deliver antibiotics to first feeding salmon fry
1995 Tested live food diets for sockeye salmon fry
1996 Evaluated reproductive behavior of chinook salmon in artificial spawning stream
1995 Compared reproductive success of captively reared and sea ranched coho salmon
1994 Determined effects of rearing sockeye salmon at either 8 or 12 C on growth, age of maturity, smoltification and gamete quality
1994 Development of methods to measure the nonspecific immune functions of salmonids
1994 Measurement of cellular immune functions of sockeye salmon throughout their entire life cycle.
1994 Quantification of the effect of rearing temperature on the ability of sockeye salmon to produce antibody response.
1994 Quantification of the effect of smoltification of sockeye salmon on immune functions which are important for disease resistance.
1997 Quantification of effects of growth rate on immune functions of chinook salmon.
1997 Test azithromycin for reducing mortality due to BKD in sockeye salmon
1998 Test azithromycin for reducing mortality due to BKD in sockeye salmon
1998 Examine mate preference in chinook salmon
1994 Established quantitative genetic experimental design
1995 Released to sea 257,000 fish marked with family specific coded wire tags
1998 Completed genetic analysis of juvenile body morphometry in base population
1998 Cultured 2-. 3-, and 4-year old PIT tagged fish form the same cohort to maturity
1998 Established experimentally inbred (1 generation, 2 levels of inbreeding) and control lines of progeny


Section 3. Relationships to Other Projects

Project ID Title Description Umbrella
9202200 Wild smolt physiology/behavior Collaborate by evaluating smoltification of experimental groups of spring chinook salmon. No


Section 4. Objectives, Tasks and Schedules

Objectives and Tasks

Objective Task
1. Determine the effect of growth rate on early male maturation, smoltification and immunocompetence in spring chinook salmon containing low levels of body fat .
1. Determine the effects of reduced temperature and ration during winter months on early male maturation in chinook salmon .
1. Determine the effects of constant vs. Variable dietary protein intake on growth, body conformation, natural spawning success, spawning behavior, and reproductive performance of chinook salmon .
2. Montior nonspecific and specific immune functions of groups of spring chinook salmon reared on high protein low fat diets reduced temperature and ration during winter months (obj. 1.2) .
2. Test effectiveness of azithromycin as an emergency treatment against acute BKD in chinook salmon .
2. Test effects of long term anit-BKD prophylactic treatment regimens with erythromycin on disease incidence, gonad development, and gamete quality in fall chinook salmon .
3. Determine effects of excercise on body composition, morphology and breeding success of captively reared chinook salmon .
3. Determine relative effects of natural emergence, remote site incubation and fry releases on the early growth of chinook salmon juveniles .
3. Compare natural breeding success of freshwater- and sea water-reared chinook salmon .
4. Determine quantitative genetic consequences of inbreeding depression on fitness of chinook salmon population .

Objective Schedules and Costs

Objective Start Date End Date Measurable Biological Objectives Milestone FY 2000 Cost %
1 10/01/97 10/01/99 Rear chinook salmon from first feeding to 2 years of age on 7 dietary treatments, collect samples for monitoring growth, smoltification and maturation Complete sample collection 3.8%
1 10/01/99 12/01/00 Evaluate effects of dietary treatments on growth physiology, smoltification, age of maturity, size and morphology Analyze samples, data and prepare manuscript 11.5%
1 10/01/98 10/01/00 Rear chinook salmon from first feeding to 2 years of age on 4 dietary/temperature regimes, collect samples for monitoring growth, smoltification and maturation Complete sample collection 9.2%
1 10/01/00 12/01/01 Evaluate effects of treatments on growth physiology, smoltification, age of maturity, size and morphology Analyze samples, data and prepare manuscript 4.0%
1 08/01/98 04/01/03 Rear chinook salmon to maturation on constant versus variable dietary protein:energy intake Rear fish to maturity and collect samples for body morphology and compostion 5.6%
1 Evaluate effects of diets on on reproductive performance, growth, morphology and behavior of chinook salmon Analyze samples, behavior of adult fish and data ,and write report  
2 06/01/99 11/01/00 Examine effects of growth and nutrition on immune function in chinook salmon Quantify effects of diet and growth regime on specific and nonspecific immunity, collect samples, analyze data and write report 7.6%
2 07/01/98 12/01/99 Test effectiveness of azithromycin as an emergency treatment for BKD in chinook salmon Meaure mortality, onset of BKD and presence of pathogen in treatment groups, analyze data, write reports 9.8%
2 05/01/99 08/01/02 Test effects of long term treatment with erythromycin on disease incidence, gonad development, and gamete quality in fall chinook salmon Rear fish, measure mortality, presence of pathogen, onset of BKD, gamete quality and survival of offspring to first feeding. Analyze data and write report 9.8%
3 06/01/00 09/01/00 Culture of chinook salmon in high and low velocity vessels Produce mature adults 2.0%
3 09/01/00 12/01/00 Body composition and morphology of exercised and non-exercied salmon Analyze morphological characters, and body composition, and complete report 2.0%
3 08/01/00 10/01/00 Breeding behavior and reproductive success of exercised and non-exercised salmon Collect spawning behavior and egg deposition data, analyze spawning behavior data and complete report 6.6%
3 09/01/00 11/01/00 Artificially spawn captively reared chinook salmon and thermally mark otoliths Produce 5000 viable salmon embryos with thermal marks 1.1%
3 01/01/01 03/01/01 Survival of embryos in remote site incubators, heath trays, and gravel Produce suitable incubation environments to achieve high survival 2.0%
3 03/01/01 05/01/01 Growth of juvenile salmon from three reintroduction strategies Collect growth data, decode otoliths, and complete report 3.1%
3 08/01/00 10/01/00 Breeding behavior and success of fresh and salt water reared salmon Collect spawning behavior and egg deposition data 1.6%
3 10/01/00 05/01/01 Breeding behavior and success of fresh and salt water reared salmon Collect spawning behavior data and assist in report 1.2%
4 11/01/94 12/01/05 Determine quantitative genetic consequences of inbreeding depression on fitness of chinook salmon population Two generations of inbreeding completed 19.0%


Section 5. Estimated Budget Summary

Itemized Budget

Item Note FY 2000 Cost
Personnel $190,600
Fringe $ 48,600
Supplies $152,200
Operating $ 38,000
Capital $ 13,500
PIT tags 2000 $ 6,000
Travel $ 16,500
Indirect $166,700
Subcontractor $ 3,000
Subcontractor $310,500
Subcontractor $ 11,000
Subcontractor $129,700
Subcontractor $ 42,000
Subcontractor $ 90,000
Subcontractor $ 15,000
Subcontractor $ 73,000
Subcontractor $ 4,000
Total Itemized Budget $1,310,300


Total estimated budget

Total FY 2000 project cost $1,310,300
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA Funds $ 0
Total FY 2000 budget request $1,310,300
FY 2000 forecast from 1999 $ 0
% change from forecast 0.0%


Reason for change in estimated budget

Not applicable


Reason for change in scope

Not applicable


Cost Sharing

Not applicable
 

Outyear Budget Totals

2001 2002 2003 2004
All Phases $1,400,000 $1,300,000 $1,200,000 $1,000,000
Total Outyear Budgets $1,400,000 $1,300,000 $1,200,000 $1,000,000
 

Other Budget Explanation

Not applicable


Section 6. References

n/a or no information


Section 7. Abstract

Abstract


Reviews and Recommendations

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

ISRP Preliminary Review , ISRP 99-2 Recommendation:
Fund for one year
Date:
Jun 15, 1999
[There are no budget numbers associated with this review.]
Comment:
Recommendation: Fund for one year. Subsequent funding contingent on inclusion of better details on organization, coordination, subcontractors. Investigators should submit this as an umbrella proposal with subproposals related to: 1) growth and diet, 2) health, 3) reintroduction strategies, and 4) genetic consequences. A detailed description of the overall organization and coordination structure should be included in the umbrella proposal.

Comments: Rationale. Captive broodstocks may/will be needed to preserve threatened chinook stocks until they can be reintroduced. There are several difficulties inherent in the strategy of using captive broodstocks for the temporary preservation of species, some of which are addressed in this multifaceted project. The project is a big one with a long history. It's difficult to follow the proposals Section 4 and Section 5 because the different facets are mixed together.

Objective/Methods. Diet & growth affect age of maturity, smoltification, morphology, and gametes. A problem for culturing captive broodstocks is how to achieve fast growth without younger maturation and without suppressing immune response, which is how to adjust protein/energy ratios in salmon diet. This is a basic issue in salmon biology - understanding the relationship between nutrition, growth, maturation age, smolting would enlighten a lot of conservation decisions. The immediate problem for captive broodstocks is the abnormal tendency of cultured chinook males to mature young as jacks, probably a consequence of abnormal nutritional environment. Health. BK disease is a big threat. Erythromycin antibiotic is the only available and ineffective treatment and id potentially toxic. Alternative azithromycin needs testing. Reintroduction. Fish bred in captivity probably would lack the physical ability to thrive at liberty. They will need exercise conditioning and a diet regimen. Inbreeding. Captive broodstocks necessarily are small, liable to inbreeding depression. It's important to evaluate experimentally inbred fish in order to understand the importance of inbreeding.

It's hard for reviewers to tell which investigator is responsible for each facet of the research, i.e. who is doing what. Some investigators demonstrate continuing peer-review of their work (e.g Hard, Shearer) others (e.g. Harrell) haven't had their work published. So reviewers' ability to judge the quality of work is mixed. The budget includes large contracts for others with unknown functions in the project and their qualifications aren't listed, which makes it more difficult for reviewers to assess the quality of work. What are functions of PMFC, Frank Orth, UW, UI, NWIFC in the project? Probably the methods in use and proposed for use are at least adequate while in some instances creative and innovative. In each area the project's work is pertinent to finding techniques for captive broodstock rearing and for understanding what the effects of the program will be. The diet and health projects are directly related to techniques of rearing; the inbreeding project's dealing with a more subtle problem and requires a long time commitment for meaningful results. But it is a central issue

This on-going FWP project has an impressive list of accomplishments since 1994 and may be one of the better FWP projects in terms of publication of results in peer-reviewed scientific journals.

This project might be better developed as an umbrella with the various components separated into sub-proposals. The "key personnel" and budget description sections need to provide more information. At a minimum, they should provide a CV for the recipients of the large subcontracts. They should better describe their internal organization and the tasks associated with the subcontractors.


CBFWA Funding Recommendation Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Aug 20, 1999
2000
$1,237,000
Comment:

CBFWA: Nonwatershed Technical Group Comments Recommendation:
Date:
Aug 20, 1999
[There are no budget numbers associated with this review.]
Comment:
Criteria all: Met? yes - How do you assess the connection between this proposal and the sockeye recovery goal.

CBFWA: Subregional Team Comments Recommendation:
Date:
Aug 20, 1999
[There are no budget numbers associated with this review.]
Comment:
This proposal has the form of an umbrella contract. The specific objectives should be separated into independent projects. We recommend removing Objective 1.3 and reducing the budget to reflect that change.

NWPPC Funding Recommendation , NWPPC 2000-6 Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Mar 1, 2000
2000
$1,236,923
Comment:
[Decision made in 9-22-99 Council Meeting]; Funding level determination for BPA

NWPPC Funding Recommendation , NWPPC 2000-6 Recommendation:
Fund at current levels
Date:
Mar 1, 2000
[There are no budget numbers associated with this review.]
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:

  • Funding should be held at levels required to fund these existing programs pending the prioritization that the Council has previously requested from NMFS, and expansion of existing programs should not be permitted. 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.
  • The Council should not consider any new funding for this technique until adequate review has been completed, and, if possible, subbasin plans are in place.
  • A review of these captive brood programs for consistency with APR report policies and standards should be conducted before additional funds are allocated to these programs or new programs.
  • The Council recommends that the Tucannon project (#20020) be permitted to continue into the three-step artificial production review process. The low-cost and short duration attributes of this project and the status of the run being treated mitigate the Council's general concerns with captive propagation projects in this particular instance. NEPA and planning work may be funded with Fiscal Year 2000 funds, and the sponsor and BPA are to work with Council staff in identifying what needs, if any, there are for that work. Funding for implementation of the project will not be approved until three-step review is complete and applicable documents address the NMFS interim standards as well as the policies, purposes and performance standards in the APR report, and until NEPA requirements are satisfied.

NW Power and Conservation Council's FY 2006 Project Funding Review Funding category:
expense
Date:
May 2005
FY05 NPCC Start of Year:
$1,468,100
FY06 NPCC Staff Preliminary:
$1,468,100
FY06 NPCC July Draft Start of Year:
$1,468,100
Sponsor (NOAA Fisheries) Comments (Go to Original on NPCC Website):

Return to top of page