FY 2007 Solicitation Homepage

Project Proposal Request for FY 2007 - FY 2009 Funding

Proposal 200001900: Tucannon River Spring Chinook Captive Broodstock Program

Download this document in MS Word format
Open this document in PDF format

Table of Contents
Part 1. Administration and Budgeting
Section 1: General Administrative
Section 2: Project Location
Section 3: Project Species
Section 4: Past Accomplishments
Section 5: Relationship to Other Projects
Section 6: Biological Objectives
Section 7: Work Elements
Section 8: Budget
Section 9: Project Future
Section 10: Documents
Part 2. Reviews
Part 1 of 2. Administration and Budgeting
Section 1: General Administrative Information
Process Information:
Date Proposal Submitted & Finalized Status Form Generator
January 6, 2006 Finalized Michael Gallinat

Proposal Type: Ongoing
Proposal Number: 200001900
Proposal Name: Tucannon River Spring Chinook Captive Broodstock Program
BPA Project Manager: Peter Lofy
Agency, Institution or Organization: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW)
Short Description: Conduct the final years of the Tucannon River Spring Chinook Captive Broodstock Program to spawn remaining adult captive broodstock and rear and mark progeny. Release progeny (smolts) into the Tucannon River to help rebuild the run and prevent extinction
Information Transfer: Information from this program will be transferred through participation in the BPA Captive Broodstock Technical Oversight Committee, through Section 10 Permit monthly reports, annual captive brood reports (available on-line at the BPA website), final project summary report and peer-reviewed journal articles. Data will be shared via the internet sites for PITAGIS, RMIS and other relevant databases (PNAMP, CSMEP, etc.). The genetic data is available from the WDFW Genetics Lab in Olympia, WA and the Meta-data files are available from the WDFW Snake River Lab in Dayton, WA.
 
Project Proposal Contacts
Contact Organization Address Phone/Email Roles Notes
Form Submitter
Michael Gallinat Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife 401 S. Cottonwood
Dayton WA 99328-1501
Ph: 509.382.4755
Fax: 509.382.2427
Email: gallimpg@dfw.wa.gov
Form Submitter
All Assigned Contacts
Michael Gallinat Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife 401 S. Cottonwood
Dayton WA 99328-1501
Ph: 509.382.4755
Fax: 509.382.2427
Email: gallimpg@dfw.wa.gov
Form Submitter
Project Lead

Section 2: Project Location
Sponsor Province: Columbia Plateau ARG Province: No Change
Sponsor Subbasin: Tucannon ARG Subbasin: No Change
Location(s) at which the action will be implemented
Latitude Longitude Waterbody Location Description County/State Subbasin Primary?
46 35 51.67 118 13 34.77 Tucannon/Snake River Lyons Ferry Hatchery Columbia, Washington Tucannon Yes

Section 3: Focal Species
Focal Species:
Primary Secondary Additional Species
Chinook Snake River Spring/Summer ESU

Section 4: Past Accomplishments
Past Accomplishments for Each Fiscal Year of This Project
Fiscal Year Accomplishments
2005 Spawn mature fish from the 2000, 2001 and 2002 BY's. Release progeny from Curl Lake Acclimation Pond (2003 BY spawn). Write and upload 2004 annual report. Collect returning adults (captive brood progeny).
2004 Spawn mature fish from the 1999, 2000 and 2001 BY's. Release progeny from Curl Lake Acclimation Pond (2002 BY spawn). Write and upload 2003 annual report. Collect first returning adults (captive brood progeny).
2003 Spawn mature fish from the 1998, 1999 and 2000 BY's. Release progeny from Curl Lake Acclimation Pond (2001 BY spawn). Write and upload 2002 annual report.
2002 Collect 2002 BY eggs (from supplementation program) to have additional males on hand to spawn with females at the end of the program. Mark 2001 BY juveniles. Spawn fish from the 1997, 1998 and 1999 BY's. Write 2001 annual report. Release progeny
2001 Collect 2001 BY eggs to continue captive broodstock. Mark by "family" the 2000 BY juveniles. Sort fish and spawn mature fish from the 1997 and 1998 BY's. Write 2000 Annual Captive Broodstock Report.
2000 Collect 2000 BY eggs to continue captive broodstock. Rear and mark by "family" the 1999 BY juveniles. Master Plan accepted by the ISRP and NPPC. Install security fencing. Sort and conduct first spawning of mature fish from the 1997 BY.
1999 Collect 1999 brood year eggs to continue captive broodstock program. Rear and mark by "family" the 1997 and 1998 brood year juveniles. Write and submit the Tucannon Master Plan for 3-step review process. Work with BPA on Environmental Assessment (NEPA)
1998 Collect 1998 brood year eggs (from supplementation program) to continue captive broodstock. Rear 1997 brood year juveniles at Lyons Ferry Hatchery. Submit FY2000 proposal to CBFWA under the NPPC Fish and Wildlife Program for review and funding.
1997 Collect 1997 brood year eggs (from supplementation program) to initiate captive broodstock.

Section 5: Relationships to Other Projects
Other Current Projects Related to this Project (any funding source)
Funding Source Related ID Related Project Title Relationship
PCSRF - WSRFB 00-1168 Tucannon & Touchet River Ripar Habitat restoration efforts will ultimately help improve spring chinook survival and run sizes in the future. The captive brood program will provide adult returns to improved habitat conditions.
PCSRF - WSRFB 00-1193 Tucannon-Touchet R. Watershed Plays critical role in improving habitat conditions in the Tucannon River Sub-basin. This should increase survival of wild and released hatchery produced fish (including captive brood progeny) and benefit egg, parr and smolt survival.
PCSRF - WSRFB 01-1224 Tucannon River Diversion Scree Improves juvenile fish survival (including captive brood progeny) to help increase run size.
PCSRF - WSRFB 02-1544 Tucannon River Screens Phase 2 Improves survival of juvenile wild and hatchery released (including captive brood progeny) fish.
BPA 198805301 Ne Or Hatchery Master Plan - N NEOH is linked with the Grand Ronde Basin captive broodstock programs, NEOH co-managers support captive broodstock plans for the Tucannon River and will assist in planning and coordination.
BPA 199305600 Demonstration of Captive Salmo Sharing of information regarding captive brood rearing techniques.
BPA 199401806 Tucannon Stream And Riparian R The Tucannon Model Watershed Program plays a critical role in improving habitat conditions for increased survival of adults and juveniles. This includes adult returns from the captive brood program and their resulting progeny.
BPA 199606700 Manchester Spring Chinook Capt Part of BPA sponsored CBTOC to share information regarding captive brood rearing and techniques.
BPA 199700100 Idaho Chinook Salmon Captive R Part of BPA sponsored CBTOC to share information regarding captive brood rearing and techniques.
BPA 199801001 Grande Ronde Captive Brood O&M Part of BPA sponsored CBTOC to share information regarding captive brood rearing and techniques.
BPA 199801006 Captive Broodstock Artificial Sharing of information regarding captive brood rearing techniques.

Section 6: Biological Objectives
Biological Objectives of this Proposed Project
Biological Objective Full Description Associated Subbasin Plan Strategy Page Nos
Use captive brood to increase run size. Chapter 7 - Management Plan 7.3.8 Additional Fish Enhancement Efforts - Use captive brood as a stop gap measure to increase run size of this ESA listed run of spring chinook. Tucannon Apply safety-net hatchery intervention based on extinction risk analysis and benefit risk assessments. (This program is a short-term, stop-gap measure to get us past the genetic bottleneck of a period of low adult returns.) 166
Use captive brood to increase run size. Chapter 7 - Management Plan 7.3.8 Additional Fish Enhancement Efforts - Use captive brood as a stop gap measure to increase run size of this ESA listed run of spring chinook. Tucannon Implement artificial propagation measures and continue existing artificial and natural production strategies. (This captive brood program in being conducted in conjunction with our regular supplementation program). 166

Section 7: Work Elements
Work Elements and Associated Biological Objectives
Work Element Name Work Element Title Description Start Date End Date Estimated Budget
PIT Tags PIT Tag Captive Brood Progeny PIT tag captive brood progeny to compare with smolts from the regular supplementation program. PIT tag a subsample of 1,000 fish to monitor their outmigration survival. 10/1/2006 4/30/2008 $4,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Use captive brood to increase run size.
* TBD: BPA Supplied PIT tags

Produce Environmental Compliance Documentation Maintain Environmental Compliance for this ESA listed species Maintain environmental compliance of this ESA listed species. Provided at zero dollars due to cost share with LSRCP. 10/1/2006 9/30/2009 $ 0
Biological Objectives Metrics
Use captive brood to increase run size.
No Metrics for this Work Element

Maintain Fish Health Routine disease sampling and analysis Routine disease sampling and analysis by the WDFW Fish Health Specialist. Monitor health of captive broodstock and their progeny. 10/1/2006 4/30/2008 $14,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Use captive brood to increase run size.
No Metrics for this Work Element

Maintain Hatchery Maintain Captive Broodstock Rearing Facilities Maintain hatchery equipment and facilities for rearing Tucannon River captive brood and their progeny. This is minor because most of the costs are with cost share from LSRCP funding of the hatcheries. 10/1/2006 4/30/2008 $3,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Use captive brood to increase run size.
No Metrics for this Work Element

Produce Hatchery Fish BY2005 Produce Tucannon River Captive Chinook Smolts Produce BY 2005 smolts and volitionally release them from Curl Lake Acclimation Pond. 10/1/2006 4/30/2007 $30,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Use captive brood to increase run size.
* Rearing: # juveniles (presmolt) into program: Rear presmolts (BY05)
* Rearing: # smolts into program: Rear BY05 smolts
* Production: # smolts released from program: Volitionally release BY05 smolts.

Produce Hatchery Fish Produce BY2006 Tucannon River Captive Chinook Progeny Produce BY2006 progeny and release from Curl Lake Acclimation Pond. 10/1/2006 4/30/2008 $45,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Use captive brood to increase run size.
* Incubation: # fertilized eggs into incubation program.: Spawn Captive Adults (BY06)
* Rearing: # eggs into program: Hatch BY06 eggs
* Rearing: # juveniles (presmolt) into program: Rear BY06 juveniles.
* Production: # smolts released from program: Release BY06 smolts from Curl Lake.

Produce Hatchery Fish Produce Tucannon River Captive Chinook- adult captive brood Rear captive brood adults and conduct final spawn of mature fish. 10/1/2006 11/1/2006 $8,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Use captive brood to increase run size.
* Rearing: # adults into program: Rear captive adults and spawn when mature.

Coordination Cooperation Coordinate and cooperate with other agencies regarding results of the Tucannon River Captive Broodstock Program. Participate when possible with the BPA Captive Broodstock Technical Oversight Committee. 10/1/2006 9/30/2009 $3,500
Biological Objectives Metrics
Use captive brood to increase run size.
No Metrics for this Work Element

Manage and Administer Projects Manage Project Monitor, evaluate, coordinate, manage, and inspect work done on the work elements as necessary. This work will be carried out throughout each year. Provide administrative oversight of the monitoring and evaluation, statement of work, budget and personnel. Implement, coordinate, and monitor project activities. Develop program changes by adaptive management. 10/1/2006 9/30/2009 $25,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Use captive brood to increase run size.
No Metrics for this Work Element

Produce Annual Report Tucannon River Captive Broodstock Annual Report Complete annual reports for distribution and uploading to the BPA website. Complete final summary report in FY09 on genetics, captive adult broodstock and juvenile data. Adult progeny returns will be completed under the LSRCP program. 10/1/2006 9/30/2009 $9,500
Biological Objectives Metrics
Use captive brood to increase run size.
No Metrics for this Work Element

Analyze/Interpret Data Data Analysis Analyze data and interpret results from the captive brood program. Utilize these results in monthly, annual and final project reports. 10/1/2006 9/30/2009 $46,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Use captive brood to increase run size.
Focal Area: Tucannon River
Primary R, M, and E Type: Analyze/Interpret effectiveness of captive brood.

Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data Collect Survival, Fecundity, and DNA Data Collect data for captive brood evaluation (adults, juveniles and returning progeny). 10/1/2006 9/30/2009 $48,500
Biological Objectives Metrics
Use captive brood to increase run size.
Focal Area: Tucannon River
Primary R, M, and E Type: Collect data on captive broodstock effectiveness.

Create/Manage/Maintain Database Consolidate DNA and spawning data and maintain meta data files. Manage and maintain meta-data files. DNA database, spawning database, etc. Submit PIT tag data to PTAGIS and CWT data to RMIS. 10/1/2006 9/30/2009 $32,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Use captive brood to increase run size.
No Metrics for this Work Element

Mark/Tag Animals Mark Captive Brood Progeny Mark captive brood progeny (100%) with coded-wire tag (CWT), no fin clips, to enable us to identify adult returns. 10/1/2006 9/30/2007 $16,500
Biological Objectives Metrics
Use captive brood to increase run size.
Focal Area: Tucannon River
Primary R, M, and E Type: Obtain information on adult returns.


Section 8: Budget

Itemized Estimated Budget
Item Note FY 2007 Cost FY 2008 Cost FY 2009 Cost
Personnel Includes 3% COLA/yr. $41,500 $42,700 $29,000
Fringe Benefits Calculated at 32% $13,280 $13,700 $9,280
Supplies Chemicals, fish marking, Genetic Analysis, etc. $30,440 $11,000 $6,820
Travel BPA CBTOC Meetings, etc. $580 $580 $ 0
Overhead Overhead Calculated at 29% $25,000 $20,000 $12,900
Other Fish Food and PIT Tags $14,200 $14,020 $ 0
Totals $125,000 $102,000 $58,000

Total Estimated FY 2007-2009 Budgets
Total Itemized Budget$285,000
Total Work Element budget$285,000

Cost sharing
Funding Source or Organization Item or Service Provided FY 2007 Est Value ($) FY 2008 Est Value ($) FY 2009 Est Value ($) Cash or in-kind? Status
USFWS - LSRCP Hatchery Facilities, Water, Electricity, M & E (smolt trapping, Redd surveys, etc.) $125,000 $125,000 $125,000 In-Kind Confirmed
Totals $125,000 $125,000 $125,000

Section 9: Project Future
Project Future Costs and/or Termination
FY 2010 Est Budget FY 2011 Est Budget Comments
$ 0 $ 0 Project Terminates after FY2009.
Future Operations & Maintenance Costs
None.
 
Termination Date Comments
End of FY2009 The BPA portion of the captive brood program will be terminated after FY2009. Monitoring and evaluation of the final returning adults and subsequent generations will be carried out under the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Lower Snake River Compensation Plan.
 
Final Deliverables
The last progeny (BY06) will be released as yearling smolts in 2008. Final analysis and reports (genetic and juvenile) will be completed in 2009.

Section 10: Narrative
Document Type Size Date

Part 2 of 2. Reviews of Proposal
Administrative Review Group (ARG) Results
Account Type:
Expense
No changes were made to this proposal


NPCC Final Funding Recommendations (October 23, 2006) [Full NPCC Council Recs]

FY 2007 Budget
$125,000
FY 2008 Budget
$102,000
FY 2009 Budget
$58,000
Total NPCC Rec
$285,000
Budget Type:Expense
Budget Category:ProvinceExpense
Recommendation:Fund
Comments:


NPCC Draft Funding Recommendations (September 15, 2006) [Full NPCC Council Recs]

FY 2007 Budget
$125,000
FY 2008 Budget
$102,000
FY 2009 Budget
$58,000
Total NPCC Rec
$285,000
FY 2007 MSRT Rec
$ 0
FY 2008 MSRT Rec
$ 0
FY 2009 MSRT Rec
$ 0
Total MSRT Rec
$ 0
Budget Category:ProvinceExpense
Comments:

Local or MSRT Comments: See Washington guidance


Independent Scientific Review Panel Final Review (August 31, 2006) [Download full document]

Recommendation: Fundable
NPCC Comments: Sponsors of the Tucannon captive propagation proposal are in the final stages of this effort and requesting funding only for rearing and release of the final cohort and monitoring the returns from several years of releases. On this basis, the ISRP concluded in their preliminary review that funding was appropriate contingent upon responding to a number of questions raised in reviewing the proposal. The sponsors responded with adequate information for the ISRP to recommend the project as fundable.

The sponsors identified six items in the ISRP review and provided answers to them:

1. Who and what projects are analyzing the genetic data sponsors are collecting as part of their monitoring program?

The sponsors identified the genetics laboratory and staff performing the analysis and provided titles of two initial reports. These reports should be made available to the Columbia River Basin scientific and management community electronically to foster information transfer. There appear to be two goals for the genotyping effort. One is to evaluate the natural spawning reproductive success of the smolts produced from captive-reared parents, the second to evaluate whether the captive program has influenced the genetic diversity in the natural population. Conducting the analysis for the first objective is straightforward. Conducting the analysis for the second objective was not explained, and it is not clear how the planned sampling will be used to complete this task. The geneticists and laboratory are well suited to execute the investigations. The ISRP understands that only tissue collections, not genotyping or analysis, are being conducted under this project at this time.

2. How does this project interface with each of the projects listed under Relationship to other Projects?

The sponsors identified two groups of projects that interface this project: other Columbia River Basin captive propagation projects and Tucannon subbasin habitat restoration projects. The brief response to this query was not particularly informative. The captive propagation projects meet regularly under the auspices of the BPA Captive Brood Technical Oversight Committee. It would have been beneficial to identify for the ISRP some guidance and adaptive changes in the captive propagation approaches as a consequences of this interaction. The sponsors for this project interact with habitat projects in the Tucannon for subbasin planning processes, and acknowledge the necessity of environmental conditions for the success of spring Chinook restoration. Unfortunately, no examples of how either effort has informed the decisions of the other are provided.

3. No mention is made of the number of smolts retained to produce the captive stock, or the actual survival of the stock…

The sponsors provided a suitable reply.

4. Captive brood derived smolts should have started returning in 2005. This data was not in the proposal and should be included in a response to the ISRP…

The sponsors provide the data, and indicate that returns appeared low. It would have been helpful if the sponsors had indicated the projected range of adult returns that they had anticipated.

5. The fish that return must also spawn successfully and produce parr and smolts for the program to benefit the species. This concept of objectives beyond production of smolts and return of hatchery adults should be reflected in an overarching project-level objective…

The sponsors identify that they are using the objectives established in the Three-Step Review. That acknowledged; they should ensure that their objectives embrace the successful production of natural fish from the smolts produced by captive broodstock.

6. Monitoring and evaluation methods need to be in greater detail…

The sponsors provide a suitable reply. The analysis will provide a comparison of captive brood, supplementation, and natural fish. Since a reference location is not identified, the analysis is unlikely to answer the question of whether a demographic benefit accrued from the captive brood program.


Independent Scientific Review Panel Preliminary Review (June 2, 2006) [Download full document]

Recommendation: Response requested
NPCC Comments: The Tucannon Spring Chinook Captive Broodstock program has generally been a well-run project and has been responsive to previous ISRP reviews through the provincial review process and the Three-Step process. Significant improvements occurred to the project through the latter review process, particularly with respect to integrating hatchery operations with subbasin habitat improvements. Sponsor are requesting funding to complete the rearing of existing hatchery raised cohorts but are not planning to continue collecting fry to bring new generations of captive broodstock into the hatchery. The project is scheduled for termination in 2009 and appears to have a budget appropriately scaled to the remaining tasks. It makes sense to take this project to a meaningful concluding point, so funding is acceptable if they respond to questions raised by the ISRP below. The following comments summarize continuing ISRP concerns with the project.

Technical and scientific background: The background presented in the technical and scientific section of the proposal is mostly a recounting of the historical development of the project, rather than a careful review of technical and scientific issues associated with captive breeding projects in general or the Tucannon project in specific. As such, much of the technical background was citation of programmatic language from subbasin, fish and wildlife program, and other co-manager management plans that authorize using artificial production as a policy matter. The final page of this section does provide evidence of poor adult returns and depressed smolt numbers as the rationale for using a captive rearing program. Sponsors also provide an estimate of the number of adults they would like to return from release of smolts produced by the captive broodstock.

Relationships to other projects: The project sponsors indicate they are participating in the BPA Captive Broodstock Technical Oversight Committee – this should be encouraged and continue. The most significant deficiency in this portion of the proposal was a lack of indication of who and what projects were analyzing the genetic data sponsors are collecting as part of their monitoring program. This should be clarified and elaborated on – i.e., what are they measuring or monitoring – in a response to the ISRP. Also, how exactly does each of the projects listed actually interfaces with 200001900.

Project history: Well-described including the domestication effects of artificial propagation on captive brood and supplementation stocks as shown in Figures 2 and 3 on female fecundity and egg morality. These are important results to present to the Columbia River Basin community.

The project sponsors identify strengths - higher than expected survival of retained smolts to captive adults - and weaknesses - lower than expected fecundities of females and lower than expected egg survival compared to wild/natural or anadromous hatchery females. The summary provided is however quite sparse. No mention is made of the number of smolts retained to produce the captive stock, or the actual survival of the stock. These should be provided in a response.

If the timeline in the proposal is correct, adult returns from the first release of captive brood derived smolts should have started returning in 2005. This data was not in the proposal and should be included in a response to the ISRP

Objectives: The primary objective - to use captive broodstock technology to increase the run size of ESA listed Tucannon River spring Chinook – is a necessary, but insufficient objective. The fish that return must also spawn successfully and produce parr and smolts for the program to benefit the species. This concept of objectives beyond production of smolts and return of hatchery adults should be reflected in an overarching project-level objective. It seems the primary objective is to use these technologies to prevent extirpation of the Tucannon independent population of spring-run Chinook during periods of near demographic collapse. Results-to-date relevant to this larger goal should be presented in the proposal.

Tasks (work elements) and methods: Adequate, if not rather lightly presented. Sponsors may be relying on ISRP familiarity with the details of the project from previous reviews, rather than presenting a more full explanation of methods. Presentation of methods was inadequate for reviewers not already familiar with the Tucannon project. The methods are a fairly simplistic listing of task definitions, and require more detail to understand and evaluate the methods and expected outcomes.

Monitoring and evaluation: Similarly, monitoring and evaluation is insufficiently identified and explained in the work elements and methods. Presentation of M&E methods was inadequate for reviewers not already familiar with the Tucannon project.

Facilities, equipment, and personnel: Adequate given the history of the project. No new facilities or special needs exist beyond the Lower Snake Comp and WDFW hatchery facilities and equipment used for conventional and supplementation production for several decades.

Information transfer: Adequate plans.

Benefits to focal and non-focal species: Focal species expected outcomes were addressed adequately for the short term. Results from the program could provide a basis for future decisions on using captive broodstock technology on an emergency basis.

Maintained by the Columbia Basin Fish & Wildlife Authority. Please direct comments or questions to the webmaster.