FY07-09 proposal 199306000

Jump to Reviews and Recommendations

Section 1. Administrative

Contacts

Section 2. Locations

Province / subbasin: Lower Columbia / Columbia Lower

Section 3. Focal species

Section 4. Past accomplishments

Section 5. Relationships to other projects

Section 6. Biological objectives

Section 7. Work elements (coming back to this)

Section 8. Budgets

Itemized estimated budget

Total estimated FY 2007-2009 budgets

Cost sharing

Section 9. Project future

Future O&M costs: The project contractors believe that the SAFE project (renamed to Select Area Fisheries Enhancement) will continue to be funded in part by BPA but will be able to attract other funding support. With present infrastructure capable of producing additional smolts at a significantly reduced cost per unit, justification for investment by other entities is attractive. CEDC is actively soliciting funding from Congress for capital improvements and some operating dollars as well as other non-governmental sources. Additional funding from BPA is likely to remain proportionally level, while accounting for modest increases due to inflationary factors. Estimated budgets for 2010 and 2011 2010 2011 Oregon $643,512 $659,498 Washington $768,972 $788,195 Clatsop Co. $429,716 $442,607 Deliverables for the level of funding depicted above would be: Smolts Released Adults Harvested (all areas) Coho 1,350,000 44,550 @ .033 SARs CHS 1,200,000 12,000 @ .01 SARs CHF 750,000 7,500 @ .01 SARs This program enables other contributions of fish of the same species totaling: Coho 1,125,000 37,125 CHF 1,250,000 12,500 The next production increases at the facilities supporting the net-pen operations would require modest capital expenditures and only minimal human resource expansion. For example, the South Fork Hatchery operated by CEDC could add 0.75 million Coho production that would utilize the existing earthen pond, if the fingerlings were available in October. The Klaskanine hatchery could provide the fingerlings with upgrades to the existing concrete pond, which is not presently being used or anticipated under the present proposal. These fish could be reared through the summer at Klaskanine then taken to the CEDC facility in the fall with no additional staffing required. Production increases of spring chinook at the Gnat Creek Hatchery could be accomplished with modifications and additional incubation, early rearing and oxygen supplementation equipment. These two steps would increase coho releases by 750,000 and spring chinook by 650,000 with only one additional FTE, plus feed, mass marking and trucking costs. Gametes are available from existing Oregon sources. The additional 0.75 million coho would cost approximately $100,000 per year, while the spring chinook would be higher at $165,000 annually. This would provide an additional 22,500 coho and 7,500 spring chinook to the program at less than $5 per adult coho and $22 per adult chinook. Further expansion of the project would require other hatchery involvement and depend upon meeting criteria under a new NOAA Biop. Additional considerations of stocks not now presently produced and harvested could extend the harvest season and generate high value fish, provided all concerns are satisfied. An example would be the late fall/winter fall chinook. These fish appear to be remnants of the earlier releases of Trask River stocks experimentally released in 1975, which seem to have colonized the South Fork Klaskanine, Youngs River and a few in the Lewis and Clark River. They are high quality and would be harvested by recreational and commercial fishers at a time of high market value and provide a fishery other than hatchery steelhead. Preliminary results of towing net pens of coho smolts out of the select areas into the lower estuary for release indicate this is a strategy likely to improve SARs. Additional studies should be done to determine the efficacy of applying this strategy to other species and other select area sites. The additional cost would in most cases require an additional tag code and the cost of contracting with fishermen to make the tows. Estimated cost per tag group per site would be $6,500. CEDC is seeking funding for multi-year towing studies from non-BPA sources.

Termination date:
Comments:

Final deliverables:

Section 10. Narrative and other documents

Reviews and recommendations

ISRP PRELIMINARY REVIEW (Jun 2, 2006)

Recommendation: Response requested

NPCC comments: This is essentially an ocean ranching plan, where hatchery fish are stocked directly into coastal areas of the Columbia estuary and harvested there on return. The technique is a unique and relevant mitigation for lost Columbia fisheries due to dams. Catch rates and benefit:cost ratios appear among the highest of artificial production projects in the basin. The proposal reviewed provided evidence of success, was well prepared, and indicated that the sponsors were receptive to previous ISRP reviews and suggestions, and responded quite well to these. Furthermore, there were positive examples of adaptive management, where some releases were discontinued based on straying rates evident from coded-wire tag (CWT) information. While there was evidence of monitoring and adaptive management, improved monitoring and evaluation is suggested. The underlying assumption of this project is that one can continually release hatchery smolts directly into the ocean without limitation, or at least without density-dependent impact on wild stocks. This remains to be tested. No plan is presented here, and it would be difficult to develop a testable design. Nevertheless, the question on ocean limitations remains, and an attempt should be made to develop the experiment(s). M&E might be further improved with better catch records and less reliance on coded-wire tags. Other, perhaps more reliable forms of catch reporting should be explored. Research on straying or habitat use could be possible by collaboration with other tagging studies. Fishing effort is designed to focus on areas of hatchery fish release. Nonetheless, a review of possible mixed-stock fisheries impacts may also be required, where some of the capture fisheries intercept other stocks. A larger research issue requires investigation, in relation to ecosystem impact (perhaps involving EcoPath with EcoSim), locally and high seas. We suggest the sponsors partner with researchers to explore the impact to the coastal ecosystem and critical areas of the continental shelf where ecosystem changes may result from massive releases of hatchery fish. Non-focal species impacts from this work may be substantial in certain areas. Impact assessment should be thoroughly conducted.

ISRP FINAL REVIEW (Aug 31, 2006)

Recommendation: Fundable

NPCC comments: The very good response to the ISRP review was detailed and informative, clearly indicating areas where success, improvement and collaboration may be possible or desired. Opportunities for partnerships in tagging and estuarine and plume studies should continue to be encouraged and supported. At a future review, an independent monitoring and assessment would serve to further substantiate the positive claims in the response such as in North et al. (2006). The reporting of results has been commendable and informative in recent years, with signs of adaptive management.