BPA Fish and Wildlife FY 1997 Proposal

Section 1. Administrative
Section 2. Narrative
Section 3. Budget

see CBFWA and BPA funding recommendations

Section 1. Administrative

Title of project
Ne Oregon Hatchery - Grand Ronde Satellite Facilities

BPA project number   8805302

Business name of agency, institution or organization requesting funding

Sponsor type   OR-Tribe

Proposal contact person or principal investigator

 NameGary James
 Mailing addressCTUIR
Department of Natural Resources
P.O. Box 638
Pendleton, OR 97801

BPA technical contact   Jerry Bauer, EWN 503/230-3694

Biological opinion ID   

NWPPC Program number   7.4L.1

Short description
Construct spring chinook juvenile acclimation/release and adult capture facilities in the upper Grande Ronde River and Catherine Creek in the Grande Ronde Basin. Utilize facilities to supplement the seriously depressed natural producing spring chinook populations.

Project start year   1990    End year   1998

Start of operation and/or maintenance   1999

Project development phase   Implementation

Section 2. Narrative

Related projects
Miscellaneous habitat enhancement projects (riparian recovery and adult and juvenile passage projects at irrigation diversion dams and canals in the upper Grande Ronde River and Catherine Creek). Multi-agency Upper Grande Ronde River Anadromous Fish Habitat Protection, Restoration, and Monitoring Plan.

Project history
Starting in 1982, the upper Grande Ronde River and Catherine Creek were target areas for outplanting production from Lookingglass Hatchery as a part of the LSRCP. However, no satellite juvenile acclimation/release facilities were ever constructed under the LSRCP at these locations. The need for satellite facilities has repeatedly been proposed as a part of the following efforts: 1) the Grande Ronde Subbasin Plan, 1989; 2) the early implementation project (EIP) initiatives in 1990; 3) the NEOH Grande Ronde component master plan, 1990; 4) the priority supplementation projects as developed by CBFWA's anadromous fish production workgroup, 1992 ; and 5) the COE funded LSRCP add-on in 1995. Through all this, conceptual designs were completed under #3 above and final designs/NEPA under #5. Project construction/implementation is still needed.

Biological results achieved
Only final conceptual designs completed at this time. See "Anticipated Outcome" for future biological results expected.

Annual reports and technical papers
Siting and conceptual design reports completed.

Management implications
The functions of the hatchery satellite facilities in the upper Grande Ronde River and Catherine Creek are essential to the restoration of spring chinook natural production and fisheries. Facilities will allow managers to: 1) release smolts in areas targeted for reestablishment of natural production with likely less straying elsewhere; 2) acclimate/imprint smolts for increased survival; and 3) capture returning adults for use as broodstock.

Specific measureable objectives
The goals and objectives of the project can be measured by: 1) the number of juvenile spring chinook that are acclimated and released at the facilities; 2) the adult contributions to the ocean and Columbia River fisheries; and 3) the Grande Ronde adult returns that are utilized for broodstock and contribute to harvest and natural production.

Testable hypothesis

Underlying assumptions or critical constraints

The specific project methods include: 1) rear spring chinook at Lookingglass Hatchery; 2) transfer pre-smolts to facilities for acclimation prior to release; 3) allow returning adults to escape to supplement natural production; 4) when returns allow, capture some returning adults for broodstock and implement fisheries; and 6) evaluate natural production success of returning hatchery fish.

Brief schedule of activities
1995 - Montgomery Watson completed final conceptual designs under NEOH BPA project
1996 - COE do final designs and NEPA under LSRCP add-on funding
1997 - Construct upper Grande Ronde facilities under this project
1998 - Construct Catherine Creek facilities under this project
1999+ Facility O & M

Biological need
Current spring chinook escapements to the upper Grande Ronde River and Catherine Creek are so small they serve minimal or no function towards seeding the habitat, providing broodstock or fisheries. Artificial production is needed in these areas to bring back the nearly extirpated spring chinook runs. The satellite facilities will specifically address juvenile acclimation/release and adult broodstock capturing needs which are essential to achieving the overall Grande Ronde Basin natural and hatchery adult return goals.

Critical uncertainties
Without juvenile acclimation/release facilities, smolt to adult survivals of hatchery releases would likely be decreased and adult returns would likely not target as well to the desirable natural production locations. Without the adult capture facilities adults could not be taken for broodstock purposes.

Summary of expected outcome
The reduced stress and imprintation of juveniles released from the acclimation facilities will increase smolt to adult survival back to the Columbia and Grande Ronde rivers. The expected eventual outcome will be restored natural production and fisheries in the upper Grande Ronde River and Catherine Creek.

Dependencies/opportunities for cooperation
BPA funds were initially used for facility siting and conceptual designs. The US Army COE is completing final designs and addressing the NEPA process in 1996 with LSRCP funding. The production facility to provide spring chinook rearing is Lookingglass Hatchery operated by ODFW. The satellite facilities will be operated by CTUIR. Evaluation of the project success will be done by CTUIR under LSRCP funding.


Monitoring activity
Monitoring and evaluation of the success of supplementing natural spring chinook production in the upper Grande Ronde River and Catherine Creek will be carried out in a manner similar to the Lookingglass Creek study being conducted by CTUIR.

Section 3. Budget

Data shown are the total of expense and capital obligations by fiscal year. Obligations for any given year may not equal actual expenditures or accruals within the year, due to carryover, pre-funding, capitalization and difference between operating year and BPA fiscal year.

Historic costsFY 1996 budget data*Current and future funding needs
1989: 110,819
1990: 296,733
1991: 192,741
1992: 27,605
1993: 97,907
1994: 7,169
1995: 0
New project - no FY96 data available 1997: 1,400,000
1998: 1,200,000
1999: 200,000
2000: 200,000
2001: 200,000

* For most projects, Authorized is the amount recommended by CBFWA and the Council. Planned is amount currently allocated. Contracted is the amount obligated to date of printout.

Funding recommendations

CBFWA funding review group   Snake River

Recommendation    Tier 1 - fund

Recommended funding level   $1,400,000

BPA 1997 authorized budget (approved start-of-year budget)   $1,400,000