< Back to list of FY 2007-2009 projects

199801006 - Captive Broodstock Artificial Propagation

Sponsor: Nez Perce Tribe

Budgets: FY07: $182,861 | FY08: $187,940 | FY09: $193,173

Short description: Implements the captive broodstock project through the collection of juvenile salmon from the wild and maintaining them in captivity. The founding generation is spawned at maturity and the resulting F1 generation is released back to the parental stream.

view full proposal

Final Council recommendation (Nov 2006)

Funding category: Expense

Recommended budgets: FY07: $175,718 | FY08: $175,718 | FY09: $175,718

Comment: ISRP fundable in part (qualified). No additional parr collection, as per ISRP recommendation, and to continue and complete the captive propagation experiment Budget reduction reflects the removal of the work element task titled - Collect 300 Naturally Produced Chinook Salmon Parr / cohort / stock. Other budget reductions not specific. Project to be implemented as proposed with reduced scope, other than what is specified.

ISRP final recommendation: Fundable in part (Qualified)

Comment:

Fundable in Part to continue and complete the captive propagation experiment. Along with 199801001, the project has already continued to collect parr beyond the time frame that was initially envisioned. Additional parr collections do not seem justified. This project should be limited to raising the parr they now have collected, and completing the envisioned experiment. Qualification is that the design of the analysis be capable of quantifying the demographic effect of natural spawning by captive propagated and supplementation adults on natural production in the next generation. Proposal 199801006 is a component, along with 199801001, of a captive propagation project for spring Chinook in the Grande Ronde subbasin. 199801006 is involved with monitoring the natural parr that are collected and then reared at hatcheries/facilities maintained by Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife and NOAA Fisheries. Sponsors of 199801001 operate acclimation facilities on Catherine Creek, Lostine River, and the upper Grande Ronde. In the preliminary review the ISRP requested a response that clarified the tasks performed by the sponsor under this proposal, and the tasks performed by other co-managers. The authors’ response clearly laid out the various organizations involved and summarized them nicely in Table 1. 2006 Field Activities Schedule and Table 2. 2006 Technical Oversight Team Meeting Schedule. They also explained the split in M&E activities at Bonneville and at Manchester. The ISRP thanks the sponsor for succinctly providing this information. The ISRP also requested a summary of the data on returning adult hatchery progeny of the captive reared parents collected as natural parr. The sponsors provided this information for the Lostine River site. The authors’ response was good in one sense – that it gave substantial details about the adult return data. In the Lostine River there has been an increase in the numbers of returning adults of all types: natural, captive propagation, and supplementation. From this brief summary it is not possible to attribute the increase in natural adults (the ultimate goal of both the captive propagation and supplementation) to either artificial production program. The ISRP urges that the analysis of data be designed to rigorously evaluate the contribution of artificial production to natural production in the next generation. There is a need to develop information on the parentage of the "naturally produced returning adults." Were they the product of wild x wild, wild x hatchery (and which type), or hatchery x hatchery (and which type) matings in the wild? The DNA pedigree analysis should provide the way to determine that, but it not clear what is to really be done. Because that information is the key to determining the real level of success of the supplementation experiment underway, that methodology could/should be explained in detail.

Response loop edit

See the sponsor's revised proposal from the response loop. You'll be taken to CBFWA's proposal system in Section 10 where most sponsors uploaded revised narratives or other responses to the ISRP comments.

State/province recommendation: Fundable, but at a reduced level

Review group: OSPIT - Blue Mountain

Recommended budgets: FY07: $175,718 | FY08: $175,718 | FY09: $175,718

Comment: OSPIT recommends holding the budget to the FY06 level and flatlining for FY08 and 09.