Response for project 200001700: Recondition Wild Steelhead Kel

Comment on proposed FY 2006 budget

The Council recommended budget for this project was $544,119. Bonneville reduced the budget to $400,000, consequently modifications were made to the project. The project enhanced monitoring in the lower Columbia River and estuary to evaluate different release strategies and de-emphized reconditioning at multiple sites. The $400,000 budget level is adequate for this effort. Data on kelt steelhead travel time, survival, and estuary residence time is being collected and analyzed.

Accomplishments since the last review

Purpose of production program (S/H/R): S = Supplementation, H = Harvest Augmentation, R = ResearchS/R
# of fish by origin (ad-clip/non-clip)1200 non-clip
Purpose of production program (S/H/R): S = Supplementation, H = Harvest Augmentation, R = ResearchS/R
# of fish into program, by life stage800 reconditioned adults/year
# of fish into program, by life stage800 reconditioned adults/year
Purpose of production program (S/H/R): S = Supplementation, H = Harvest Augmentation, R = ResearchR
# of fish transported400

We have successfully developed and refined kelt steelhead husbandry techniques that could be implemented at other locations. In some years, long-term survival and rematuration rates have exceeded 60% and 90%, respectively. This resulted in an escapement increase of 7.3% in 2002-03. Diet formulations have been developed, tested, and compared. We have developed several potential kelt steelhead management scenarios that we are evaluating and testing. Management scenarios include 1.)long-term reconditioning where individuals are held and fed for approximately 8 months then released for natural spawning; 2.) short-term reconditioning and transport, where kelts are collected and fed for 4 to 6 weeks and then trucked and released below Bonneville Dam; and, 3.) direct transport and release, where kelts are collected and transported to below Bonneville dam and released without being held or fed in captivity. For the short-term reconditioning and direct release scenarios we have been collecting information on travel time, survival, estuary residence time, ocean entry and return timing using biotelemetry techniques. One open ocean detection has been made. In 2004, we began investigations into gamete and progeny viability from artificially reconditioned steelhead.

FY 2006 goals and anticipated accomplishments

Develop RM&E Methods and DesignsDevelop research plan for gamete viability study.
Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab DataCollect telemetry data on kelt steelhead as they move through the lower Columbia River and into the ocean. Data generated will include travel time, and survival.
Analyze/Interpret DataCompare and contrast different management approaches each utilizing kelt steelhead. Approaches will range from very low cost / low intervention to higher cost / intense intervention.

1. Evaluate effects of directly transporting steelhead kelts around the hydro system on enhancement of iteroparity. 2. Evaluate effects of short-term kelt reconditioning and subsequent transportation of kelts around the hydro system on enhancement of iteroparity. 3. Evaluate effects of long-term kelt reconditioning and subsequent release for natural spawning on enhancement of iteroparity. 4. Evaluate effects of long-term kelt reconditioning and captive spawning on: a) gamete and progeny viability; and b) enhancement of iteroparity. 5. Comprehensive project evaluation and management recommendations.

Subbasin planning

How is this project consistent with subbasin plans?

This project was included in the mainstem and systemwide provincial review and is included in the revised Biop. The concept of reconditioning kelt steelhead is mentioned in several subbasin plans and this project is specifically cited in the following subbasin plans. 1. Columbia Lower Mid Subbasin Plan --outlines strategies for improving the survival of steelhead kelts, mature, spawned out fish that have the potential to spawn again. p.315 2. Columbia Upper Mid Subbasin Plan -- pg 70 3. Deschutes Subbasin Plan -- pg 5-6 4. Entiat Subbasin Plan -- 5. Upper Columbia Basin pg 56,60 6. Hood River Subbasin Plan 7. Klickitat Subbasin Plan pg 347-348 8. Methow Subbasin Plan pg 362 9. Okanogan Subbasin Plan pg 116 10. Umatilla Subbasin Plan pg G-10 11. Walla Walla Subbasin Plan pg 32 12. Yakima Subbasin Plan pg chapter 2-193

How do goals match subbasin plan priorities?

This work is a high priority in at least __ subbasin plans including 1. Rock Creek pg 347-348 in the Columbia Lower Mid Subbasin Plan. 2. Okanogan Subbasin pg 63-64; 328; 331; 404 3. Klickitat Subbasin pg 347-348 4. Yakima Subbasin chapter 4-36.

Other comments