Fish and wildlife Artificial Production Archive Sep 14, 1998 meeting

Handout for Sep 14, 1998 meeting

An ecosystem approach to species recovery requires close coordination of habitat and production measures. Coordination should ensure that habitat and production measures are driven by the needs of specific populations and by the condition of the watersheds in which those populations live. Effective coordination should provide an opportunity to build on the energy and initiatives of local communities. This helps ensure that ratepayers get maximum return from their investments and makes the best use of the subbasin and system-wide plans prepared by the fish and wildlife agencies and Indian tribes. The process outlined in this section should rely on the analysis and judgment contained in these plans and other resource plans. Implementors should adapt those plans to the needs of weak stocks and watershed conditions.

In Sections 7.0 through 7.5, the Council calls for immediate efforts to gather data on wild and naturally spawning stocks, review impacts of the existing hatchery system and coordinate supplementation activities. ... In the Council’s view, this work will greatly assist the region's decision-making processes. In the absence of this work, the Council believes that implementation of habitat and production measures will continue to suffer from inadequate information, disjointed policies, uncertainty and delay. The region should begin this work promptly, to overcome these obstacles and allow recovery efforts to proceed expeditiously.

7.0D Comprehensive Environmental Analysis of Federal Production Activities
A Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement is being designed to assess the impacts on naturally produced salmon of large numbers of anadromous fish being introduced from federally funded hatcheries in the Columbia River Basin. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is examining the options and opportunities for changing how, when, where and why hatchery-produced salmon and steelhead are released into Columbia Basin streams.

  The Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement was not designed to specifically meet any Council program objective. However, it is being funded in substantial part by the Bonneville Power Administration. It is evident that overlap exists between some Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement objectives and specific Council measures. The Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement objectives that potentially satisfy Council measures need to be identified and coordinated with the Council program to avoid duplication and expedite resolution of questions surrounding the use of hatchery-reared salmon and steelhead. The following Council measures have been tentatively identified as being partly or completely addressed by Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement: 7.1C.1, 7.1F.1, 7.1F.2 and 7.2A.2. In helping to fund the Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement, Bonneville may appropriately take credit for funding portions of those measures.

Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Authority
7.0D.1 Periodically consult with Council on status of Comprehensive Environmental Analysis, particularly regarding progress on those measures listed above and any reevaluation of planned accomplishments.

Identify areas where additional effort is required to more fully address the Council measures listed above or where Comprehensive Environmental Analysis activities could logically be expanded to address additional Council measures.

Identify measures in the Council’s program where additional or more timely progress would facilitate Comprehensive Environmental Analysis achieving its objectives.

7.1 Ensure Biodiversity
Scientists and natural resource managers have become increasingly concerned about the need to manage fish and wildlife in a way that recognizes the importance of a diverse and productive ecosystem. Biodiversity is the variety of and variability in living organisms, with respect to genetics, life history, behavior and other fundamental characteristics. Biodiversity is important at the levels of landscapes, ecosystems, species and populations. There is increasing recognition that conserving biodiversity is key to the sustainability of natural resources, including fish and wildlife. Conserving biodiversity means fostering human development activities that protect the integrity of ecosystems, thereby sustaining natural resources.
 
7.1A Evaluation of Carrying Capacity
Implementing an ecosystem approach requires knowledge of the Columbia River ecosystem. The Council therefore calls on Bonneville and federal agencies to evaluate salmon survival in the Columbia River, its estuary and in the near-shore ocean. This analysis should increase understanding of the ecology, carrying capacity and limiting factors that influence salmon survival under current conditions.

  Bonneville
7.1A.1 Fund an evaluation of tributary, mainstem (including reservoirs), estuary, plume, near-shore ocean and marine salmon survival, ecology, carrying capacity and limiting factors. Include analysis of competition between non-native species and anadromous salmonids and negative competitive interactions resulting from hatchery management practices. As part of the evaluation, estimate the current salmon carrying capacity of the Columbia River mainstem, tributaries, estuary, plume and near-shore ocean for juvenile fish, using primarily existing data. The analysis should include an evaluation of the effects of the alteration and timing of the ocean plume as caused by the construction and operation of the hydroelectric system. The evaluation should identify residency time of juvenile salmonids, and their level of smoltification. Management measures to protect and improve estuary habitat as well as increase the productivity of the estuary should also be identified. The evaluation should make recommendations for management responses to fluctuating estuary and ocean conditions, such as adjusting total numbers of releases to take such conditions into account. The evaluation should include analysis of existing data, identification of critical uncertainties and research needs, and estimates of incremental gains in survival from improvements in each area. The analysis should also propose a monitoring program to identify optimal timing for residency in the estuary and the near-shore environment (coordinate with measure 7.2D.2. under Improved Propagation at Existing Facilities).

7.1A.2 Fund development of a study plan based on the critical uncertainties and research needs identified in the above evaluation, which should be presented to the Council by December 1995. The study plan should include provisions for federal funding or cost sharing of the study. Upon approval by the Council, Bonneville and/or other parties identified by the Council should fund the proposed study.

States of Oregon and Washington and Federal Agencies
7.1A.3 Based on existing information, identify management measures that can be implemented immediately to provide better protection and improve estuarine productivity. Include identification of seasonal water volume needs in the estuary for fish and wildlife. Report to the Council by June 30, 1995, on opportunities, needed actions, time frame and funding sources to implement recommendations.

7.1A.4 Explore expanding the scope of the Columbia River Estuary Bi-State Study to include all of the Columbia River Basin. This study could be an effective means of addressing comprehensively all interrelated water quality and quantity aspects of the basin. Also, explore the feasibility of the Columbia Basin participating in the Environmental Protection Agency’s national "estuaries of significance" program.

Council
7.1A.5 Begin rulemaking in December 1995 to identify measures aimed at improving estuary conditions and survival for salmon and steelhead. Review results of the Columbia River Estuary Bi-State Study as well as other pertinent information to develop these measures.

7.1B Conserve Genetic Diversity

  Council Genetics Team
7.1B.1 Review current efforts for conserving genetic diversity within and among Columbia River Basin salmon and steelhead stocks. Report to the Council by December 31, 1995. The review should provide recommendations for how to achieve sustainable increases in salmon and steelhead populations. Specifically, recommend an approach to identify provisional genetic conservation units for production and harvest, and rules for taking action with regard to those conservation units. Coordinate with measure 7.1C.1. The team also should assist in the development of performance standards for conserving genetic diversity of natural, supplemented and hatchery stocks.

7.1B.2 Participate in the coordinated habitat and production process described in Section 7.0A.1. Develop technical proposals for improved conservation of biodiversity, including identification of genetic conservation refuges, alternative approaches to artificial production and any other appropriate proposals.

7.1C Collection of Population Status, Life History and Other Data on Wild and Naturally Spawning Populations
To meet the program goal, base-line information that will improve management and conservation of wild and naturally spawning populations is needed. High priority populations should be identified immediately so that these can be monitored as soon as possible. An extensive initial data collection effort is needed so that provisional population units in the basin can be identified. And long-term monitoring strategies need to be developed. The following actions should be coordinated with development of rebuilding schedules called for in Section 4. Utilize the Habitat Selection Criteria developed by the coordinated habitat and production process as part of the criteria for collection of biological data.

  Bonneville
7.1C.1 Fund a study to: 1) determine what level of differentiation is necessary to identify stock boundaries or genetic differences, and 2) determine what attributes need to be measured. Obtain peer review of the study approach and the results. Report study progress periodically to the Council. The study should begin no later than February 1, 1995, and conclude by June 1995.

7.1C.2 Fund the design of an extensive one- or two-year study to identify wild and naturally spawning salmon and steelhead populations in the Columbia River Basin based on genetic, morphological, life history and any other relevant information. Recommend possible indicator populations for monitoring. Consult with appropriate specialists in designing the project. Take into consideration the findings from measure 7.1C.1 and coordinate with the Genetics Team (see measure 7.1B.1). Bring alternative study designs to the Council by December 31, 1992. Upon Council approval, fund the study.

Fishery Managers in Consultation with National Marine Fisheries Service and Other Technical Experts
7.1C.3 Develop and submit to the Council a proposed program to collect information on wild and naturally spawning populations, including index populations, by June 30, 1996. This should be consistent and coordinated with population monitoring specified as part of the rebuilding schedules in Section 4. The long-term objective of the program is to collect information related to the sustainability of wild and naturally spawning salmon and steelhead populations, including risk-containment monitoring of impacts of management action or inaction. The program should include proposals to accomplish the following elements:

· Refine the identification of wild and naturally spawning populations provided for above and develop necessary data bases.
· Develop a profile on the status of wild and naturally spawning populations.
· Develop a profile on genetic, life history and morphological characteristics of wild and naturally spawning populations. Describe the characteristics to be maintained by management actions.
· Identify limiting factors for wild and naturally spawning populations.
· Identify natural carrying capacity of habitat for the populations.

7.1C.4 Coordinate with the activities described above and fund a project to scope program costs, duration, feasibility and relative benefits for levels of monitoring ranging from complete monitoring of all wild and naturally spawning salmon and steelhead populations, to monitoring of index populations only. Report to the Council with alternative program approaches by September 30, 1996.

7.1D Wild and Naturally Spawning Population Policy
To conserve, manage and rebuild the basin’s remaining wild and naturally spawning populations, a policy giving such populations explicit priority is needed.

Oregon, Idaho and Washington and Indian Tribes
7.1D.1 By March 31, 1995, develop and review with the Council a proposed wild and naturally spawning population conservation policy consistent with the Council’s overall program goal and intended to protect genetic diversity, population identity, long-term fitness and evolutionary capacity. The policy should address habitat protection, restoration, management and improvement; water use; harvest management; releases of non-native fish; interactions between resident and anadromous fish; use of wild and naturally spawning populations as brood stock for artificial production; risk assessment and containment; and monitoring and evaluation. Consider recovery plans and other products developed under the Endangered Species Act for Columbia River Basin species in development of this policy.

7.1D.2 By June 30, 1995, in consultation with appropriate specialists in genetics and state, federal and tribal land and water managers, establish a comprehensive wild and naturally spawning salmon population conservation program. Provide for Council and public review. The program should consider for inclusion, but not be limited to, the following:

· Management and funding to address factors that limit populations.
· Habitat management and restoration to maintain and increase the productivity of wild and naturally spawning populations through the maintenance of their biological characteristics.
· Management to maintain the genetic, life history and morphological characteristics of wild and naturally spawning populations, including sustainable long-term spawning escapements and redd counts.
· Maintenance of reproductive isolating mechanisms for wild and naturally spawning populations.
· Determination of current and sustainable effective population sizes for wild and naturally spawning populations, and determination of natural carrying capacity of the habitat that supports these populations.
· Annual evaluation and reporting of the results of fisheries, land and water management actions.
· Recovery plans and other products developed under the Endangered Species Act for Columbia River Basin species.

7.1E Population Vulnerability Analyses

Bonneville
7.1E.1 Fund a review of existing procedures for conducting population vulnerability analyses for depleted salmon and steelhead populations. The procedures should be used to determine the status of populations and facilitate the selection of options for recovering them. Coordinate with appropriate fishery managers, specialists in genetics and the regional analytical methods coordination process (see Section 3). Report findings and recommendations for development and application to the Council by June 30, 1995.

7.1F Systemwide and Cumulative Impacts of Existing and Proposed Artificial Production Projects

Bonneville
7.1F.1 Design a study to evaluate the cumulative and systemwide impacts of existing and proposed artificial production activities on the ecology, genetics and other important characteristics of Columbia River Basin anadromous and resident fish. Coordinate this study with the genetic impact assessment of Columbia River Basin hatcheries called for in Section 7.2A.2. Report to the Council by December 31, 1995. Upon Council approval, fund the study.

7.1F.2 Fund a study to develop a method to be used by project proposers and implementors for assessing systemwide and cumulative impacts of proposed new artificial production projects. The method should take into account impacts of ongoing artificial production programs as identified above. The method should help meet requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act and the Endangered Species Act. Report to the Council by June 1996.

Fishery Managers
7.1F.3 In addition to existing methods for evaluating proposed artificial production projects (for example, Regional Assessment of Supplementation Project and Chapter III.C of the Integrated System Plan), use the method for assessing systemwide and cumulative impacts when available (see 7.1F.2).

7.1G Adjust Total Number of Hatchery Fish Released to Stay Within Basin Carrying Capacity
The number of hatchery fish released into the Columbia River has steadily increased since hatchery production began in the late 1800s. Between 170 million and 200 million hatchery fish are released into the Columbia River Basin system annually. However, the capacity of the Columbia River Basin to support young fish has decreased during this time. Some scientists have suggested that the number of fish released may exceed the capacity of the present-day river, estuary and ocean to support their growth and survival to adulthood. Exceeding system carrying capacity may be partly responsible for decreasing survival of hatchery and wild and naturally spawning stocks.

Fishery Managers
7.1G.1 Until the carrying capacity preliminary evaluation in Section 7.1A.1 is complete (December 1995), take precautions to not exceed carrying capacity for juvenile salmonids through operations of Columbia River Basin hatcheries. Report to the Council by December 31, 1995, on the precautionary measures that will be put in place.

7.1H Reprogramming of Existing Hatchery Stocks and Facilities
The Council acknowledges the commitment of parties to U.S. v. Oregon to use the framework of the Columbia River Fish Management Plan to rebuild upriver runs through production planning and the commitment of the parties to make recommendations for actions by June 1995. The Council further recognizes that Congress has instructed the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service to prepare plans and implement pilot programs designed to assist in rebuilding fish runs above Bonneville Dam and to report to Congress on such activities within 120 days of enactment of those agencies’ appropriations.

Fishery Managers
7.1H.1 To coordinate with the foregoing measures, the Council calls on the fishery managers to:

· take the products of the Regional Assessment of Supplementation Project and the Council’s genetics team into consideration in production planning;
· obtain review of production plans by appropriate scientific experts in light of the frameworks provided by the Regional Assessment of Supplementation Project and the Council’s genetics team;
· coordinate with the Integrated Hatchery Operations Team in production planning; and
· periodically brief the Council on progress.

Council
7.1H.2 Review a comprehensive plan developed by the fish and wildlife agencies and tribes for reprogramming lower river hatcheries. Where current knowledge is sufficient, certain stocks may be moved to particular upriver streams. Initial efforts shall focus on the needs of upriver stocks. The fish and wildlife agencies and the tribes will cooperate in this effort.

Bonneville
7.1H.3 After Council review of the reprogramming plan developed by the fish and wildlife agencies and Indian tribes, provide funds to transfer a portion of the fish from existing lower Columbia River hatcheries to release sites in the upper Columbia River system to assist in restoring naturally spawning stocks, as provided in that plan. The Mitchell Act and John Day hatcheries were provided to mitigate fishery losses that result from the federal development of the Columbia River Basin for hydropower and other purposes (such as irrigation and navigation) for which these projects were authorized. Reprogramming hatchery operations by developing new release strategies is intended to help rebuild upriver runs and improve tribal fisheries. The Council strongly supports restoration of naturally spawning upriver stocks, but further consultation with the fish and wildlife agencies and tribes is required to determine a final release plan.

7.1I Biodiversity Institute

All Interested Regional Entities
7.1I.1 Cooperatively fund a feasibility study for a Pacific Northwest biodiversity institute. The institute would address native and resident salmonids, their habitat and ecosystems at stream, watershed and landscape levels. The purpose of the institute would be to assist in developing research and monitoring programs, provide scientific peer review, provide scientific expertise for regional planning and conduct research. Upon Council approval, fund project design, including cost sharing.

7.2 IMPROVE EXISTING HATCHERY PRODUCTION
Because opportunities to achieve significant salmon production increases through improving natural habitats are limited, additional salmon increases may have to be achieved through artificial production by creating artificial spawning and rearing environments such as hatcheries. The dilemma is that artificial production can have negative effects on wild and naturally spawning salmon populations. For example, young hatchery-produced fish may compete with wild and naturally produced juveniles for food and habitat. Or, returning hatchery-bred adults may interbreed with naturally spawning fish, altering gene pools. In the past, artificial production programs have had detrimental effects on wild gene pools and biodiversity.

In developing these production measures, the Council has identified measures that are consistent with the goal of doubling the number of salmon and steelhead in the basin while maintaining existing levels of biodiversity. This means understanding and documenting the life cycle of wild and naturally spawning fish populations at the stream level so that broader management decisions, while not necessarily made at the stream level, are better informed. It means improving the operations of artificial production facilities, so that impacts of hatchery fish on wild and naturally spawning populations are minimized and the quality of hatchery fish is improved. It means making investments and other adjustments to provide harvest opportunities in tributaries or other areas and to facilitate rebuilding of weak populations. It includes scientifically supported programs to supplement weak wild and naturally spawning fish populations with hatchery fish. It also means proceeding with extreme caution to avoid damaging remaining wild and naturally spawning populations, and fully implementing adaptive management with a systematic monitoring and evaluation strategy.

Populations whose numbers have been greatly depleted as a result of human activities pose a special dilemma. All parties agree that restoring the freshwater habitats and migration corridors of Columbia River Basin salmon is key to recovering depleted populations. There is concern, however, that implementation of passage improvement, habitat protection and restoration measures that have been proposed to date will not be sufficient to recover depleted populations in a timely manner. As a result of this concern, artificial propagation has been identified as an important tool to further aid depleted populations. However, there has been much debate in the region concerning the proper role of artificial propagation.

Some oppose or are skeptical of using artificial propagation to assist depleted populations. This is because of the risk that artificial propagation could change the identity of depleted isolated populations or reduce their ability to recover by altering their ability to survive over the long term in their natural environment.

Others recommend the proper use of some form of artificial propagation (such as supplementation) to aid in recovery of depleted populations. Proponents of this view say that numerous small populations are being lost due to continuing damage and lack of corrective action, with the result that basinwide population diversity is declining. They fear that these populations have already lost the ability to recover on their own because severe reductions in population size have already reduced the genetic diversity important for recovery. In addition, these populations may not be well adapted to survival in the face of dramatic human-caused changes in the basin’s environment. Thus, proponents of artificial propagation recommend rapidly increasing the sizes of these small populations to prevent their extinction and loss of genetic diversity by properly using some form of artificial propagation.

The process of devising the best strategies for restoration of depleted populations of threatened and endangered species will require rigorous integration of genetics, evolutionary biology, demography and ecology in addition to the best cooperative efforts of resource managers. Scientific resolution is unlikely to provide one "generic" answer, but rather two or more different answers appropriate for different existing conditions of populations in the basin.

Because the Council recognizes that there are legitimate biological concerns associated with measures to protect and restore depleted anadromous fish populations, it calls for the undertaking of multiple actions on a site-specific basis.

For salmon, the Council envisions a strategy that considers all available options to develop an effective approach to salmon restoration, and monitors and evaluates the results of these actions in an adaptive management approach. The appropriate combination of actions for a specific population should be determined by the site-specific circumstances of that population. The following options should be considered:

· Take actions to protect and rebuild the freshwater habitat of weak wild and naturally spawning populations. This would include combinations of a variety of techniques: restoring healthy stream/river habitats used for spawning, rearing and overwintering; improving mainstem passage and migration corridor condition; reducing losses of downstream migrants owing to irrigation diversions; restoring water quality; and restoring overall watershed and riparian system condition. Fish harvest rates also should be reduced to support rebuilding.
· Take actions to rebuild populations of weak wild and naturally spawning fish as quickly as possible. This would include combinations of a variety of techniques such as: the proper use of artificial propagation to prevent extinction and further loss of genetic diversity; prevention or minimization of detrimental genetic and ecological impacts to wild and naturally spawning populations from all human actions affecting the river and its watershed, including hatchery programs; and management of fish harvests to support rebuilding.
· Fully implement adaptive management for the purposes of carrying out restorative actions. Adaptive management is an approach to complex natural resource problems where prompt corrective action is needed despite incomplete knowledge of the resource. Adaptive management relies on a systematic monitoring and evaluation strategy.

Develop a procedure for conducting a population vulnerability analysis to determine the status of various populations and facilitate the selection of various options for restoring the population.

7.2A Hatchery Policies, Coordination and Operations
Nearly 100 artificial production facilities produce 170 million to 200 million smolts annually in the Columbia River Basin. Approximately 75 percent of Columbia River Basin salmon and steelhead adults are produced in hatcheries. The purpose of these facilities is to mitigate for losses of salmon and steelhead production resulting from dams and other developments. The facilities are operated by different entities, each with its own guidelines for selection, maintenance and spawning of brood stock, mating, rearing and release of juveniles. The Council concluded that regional standards and procedures for hatchery operations should be developed that are consistent with the goal of rebuilding weak wild and naturally spawning stocks. To help develop tools to reduce the impacts of hatchery production on wild and naturally spawning stocks, the Council convened a group of nationally recognized geneticists. These geneticists have been asked to bring the best current scientific knowledge to salmon and steelhead production issues. A number of products have resulted from this effort and are being reviewed at the technical and policy levels in the region.

Bonneville
7.2A.1 Fund fishery managers and other experts as needed to develop by October 31, 1995, in consultation with appropriate specialists in genetics, basinwide guidelines to minimize genetic and ecological impacts of hatchery fish on wild and naturally spawning stocks. In the development of the guidelines, apply the best available scientific knowledge, and include: 1) approaches to basinwide coordination of hatchery production to reduce impacts of hatchery stocks on wild and naturally spawning fish; and 2) monitoring and evaluation of hatchery and wild and naturally spawning stock interactions. Submit a report to the Council for public review by March 1, 1996.

7.2A.2 Fund the design of an impact assessment to examine the effects of Columbia River Basin hatcheries (individually and collectively) on wild and naturally spawning fish. The impact assessment would use the best available scientific knowledge and state-of-the-art assessment procedures. Coordinate with measure 7.1F.2, complete the design, and report to the Council by December 1995.

7.2A.3 Continue to fund the activities of the Integrated Hatchery Operations Team and the Implementation Plan for Integrating Regional Hatchery Policies.

Council
7.2A.4 Continue to convene and fund a team of scientific experts that will be available to Bonneville, the Council, the fishery managers and the Integrated Hatchery Operations Team to help scope the hatchery impact assessment (see section 7.1F) and review basinwide hatchery operating policies and guidelines. The team will be available to consult with Bonneville, the Council and the fishery managers or the implementation of new artificial production activities. It also will review ongoing artificial production, in light of the basinwide hatchery operating guidelines. The products and activities of the team will be made available for public review.

Fishery Managers
7.2A.5 The Integrated Hatchery Operations Team should consist of representatives from Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Idaho Department of Fish and Game, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Indian Nation, Nez Perce Tribe, Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation, Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon, Shoshone-Bannock Tribes of Fort Hall, Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation, National Marine Fisheries Service, and associate members. It should coordinate with production planning activities described in this section. Duties of the group are described below.

Integrated Hatchery Operations Team
7.2A.6 Continue to update regionally integrated policies for management and operation of all existing and future hatcheries in the Columbia Basin as required. These policies should be monitored for consistency with the goal of increasing sustained production while maintaining genetic resources in the Columbia River Basin.

The policies should continue to include the following elements:

· Fish health policy: Hatchery practices and operations should preclude the introduction and/or spread of any fish disease within the Columbia Basin, and maximize the health of fish released from hatcheries.
· Genetic policy: Hatchery facilities and programs should avoid adverse genetic effects on wild, natural and hatchery fish populations and enhance the sustained quality of production from hatcheries.
· Ecological interactions policy: Hatchery facilities and programs should avoid adverse interactions between wild, natural and hatchery fish populations, including predation, displacement or competition for habitat. They should maximize post-release survival of hatchery fish by increasing similarity of hatchery fish to wild and naturally spawning fish, and by balancing the numbers of fish released and release strategies with the capacity of the natural environment.
· Hatchery performance standards policy: The purpose, goals and objectives of each hatchery should be evaluated in light of the general hatchery policies stated above. Performance standards should be developed for each hatchery, in addition to those provided in this program, including expectations for harvest, maintenance of genetic integrity (including life history, effective population size, morphology and other important traits), fish health and ecological interactions. Criteria and plans for monitoring and evaluating achievement of the performance standards should be developed.
· Regional hatchery coordination policy:Columbia River Basin production facilities should operate under a regional coordination program, including hatchery programs and operations, harvest and research. The objectives of the coordination program should be to facilitate implementation of the regional hatchery policies, incorporate harvest and research considerations in hatchery planning, increase information exchange, coordinate operations to minimize impacts on wild and naturally spawning populations, and foster sharing of facilities to increase their effectiveness.

7.2A.7 Submit to the Council a plan for implementing the policies by December 1994. As part of implementing the regional hatchery coordination policy, identify measures for better coordinating basinwide hatchery management that ensure coordinated planning and learning while encouraging creative, site-specific approaches to improving operations. Upon Council approval of the plan, fishery managers may request Council approval of Bonneville funding for implementing specific parts of the policies.

7.2A.8 Review the formal audit report findings. Submit recommended actions to the appropriate operating and funding entities. Annually report findings to the Council.

7.2A.9 Continue to review and update audit criteria and obtain independent scientific review for the criteria and revise them as necessary. Report to the Council on this and the following measures annually in January.

7.2A.10 Update hatchery operating plans annually for anadromous fish production facilities in the basin.

7.2A.11 Report to the Council annually, beginning in January 1995. Describe new hatchery policies and how operations at existing and planned hatcheries are being changed to implement them and any new information leading to revision of policies and operations. New information should include results of the hatchery impact assessment (Section 7.2A.2), the hatchery survival trends analysis (Section 7.2B.2) and the carrying capacity evaluation (Section 7.1A), when available. Finally, describe the extent of achievement of performance standards, and recommend future improvements and needed research. The annual report will be made available for review by all relevant parties.

7.2B Hatchery Evaluation

Bonneville
7.2B.1 Beginning in 1995, fund ongoing independent audits of hatchery performance in consultation with the Integrated Hatchery Operations Team. Such audits should be conducted at least every three years and more frequently, if possible and warranted. Include recommendations for improving performance and for modifying or terminating hatchery programs based on audit criteria. Results of the audits should be presented to the Council beginning in January 1996.

7.2B.2 Fund a comprehensive analysis of existing data on basinwide trends in hatchery fish survival. The analysis should identify trends over time and by hatchery or geographic area, and correlate hatchery fish survival with natural factors, hatchery operations and other fish or river management actions. The results of the analysis should be reported to the Integrated Hatchery Operations Team by January 1996.

7.2C Creative Partnerships in Hatchery Production

Bonneville
7.2C.1 By June 15, 1995, fund an analysis of opportunities for alternative hatchery institutional arrangements and ways to implement them. By December 31, 1995, develop and report to the Council on the potential for artificial production programs in which alternative institutional arrangements between implementors and managers are used.

7.2C.2 The Council does not take a position on funding for the construction of any other hatcheries or the operation and maintenance of existing hatcheries

7.2D Improved Propagation at Existing Facilities
Numerous biological and environmental factors are known to affect the quality of juvenile fish released from hatcheries. The term "husbandry" refers to the proper control of these factors. In the hatchery, the factors affecting juveniles include nutrition, rearing density, water temperature, physiological state of smoltification, dissolved oxygen and nitrogen, ambient sound levels and type of rearing pond or raceway. For returning adults, size, location and time of release are primary factors affecting their migrant patterns.

The traditional spring outmigration period for most wild juvenile salmon and steelhead in the Columbia River Basin is in April and May. Historically, hatchery release strategies emulated wild fish outmigration in terms of the timing and size of juvenile fish released from hatcheries. But environmental conditions in the river and estuary have changed markedly due to hydroelectric development. New rearing strategies are required to match the release time of hatchery salmon and steelhead to the changed conditions of the river and estuary. Downstream migrations must be programmed to coincide with the most favorable conditions of food availability, predator abundance, river and ocean temperatures, flows and other influencing factors.

A number of complex changes occur in salmon and steelhead that allow them to convert from freshwater residents to saltwater residents. Several biochemical, physiological, morphological and behavioral processes are involved. A greater understanding of these processes is required to improve smolt survival after their release from hatchery facilities.

Due to the high density of fish in hatcheries, rearing ponds and transportation systems, infectious diseases and parasites also are a major concern. Sensitive, accurate and rapid diagnosis would help operators detect the presence of a disease and permit timely treatment.

Bonneville
7.2D.1 Fund research, development and demonstration of improved husbandry practices at hatcheries, which will lead to increased production and improved fish survival to adulthood. Also fund tests of new techniques at Columbia River Basin artificial propagation facilities.

7.2D.2 Immediately fund an evaluation to determine whether the high levels of sound at hatcheries has an adverse effect on survival of hatchery fish after they are released. Develop cost-share programs to fund necessary improvements at hatcheries if sound is found to adversely affect survival. Submit findings and recommendations to the Council regarding the relationship of sound to survival by December 31, 1996.

7.2D.3 Fund research, development and testing of hatchery rearing operations and release strategies aimed at improving the efficiency of hatcheries and increasing the survival of artificially propagated fish to adulthood. This research, development and testing should incorporate effective husbandry practices from Section 7.2D.1.

7.2D.4 Fund development of programs and methods to improve fish health protection in hatchery facilities. The development and related research of methods should include:

· prevention of the introduction of diseases into the Columbia River Basin;
· prevention of the spread of detected fish pathogens;
· improvement of breeding and rearing practices;
· minimization of the impact of fish diseases on wild and cultured stocks; and
· improvement in detection, diagnosis and control of fish diseases and parasites.

7.2D.5 Upon approval by the Council, provide funds to develop a sensitive, reliable index for predicting smolt quality and readiness to migrate. The index shall be validated by conducting a test using a selected species and selected hatcheries. Proposals for further action may be submitted to the Council upon completion of the test.

Bonneville
7.2D.6 Consult with the Integrated Hatchery Operations Team regarding needed research projects to improve fish health in both hatchery and naturally reared populations.

Integrated Hatchery Operations Team
7.2D.7 Develop a comprehensive fish health research agenda taking into consideration information provided, for example, by the Pacific Northwest Fish Health Protection Committee, the independent audits authorized in Section 7.2B.1, results from monitoring and evaluation studies, and asking various entities that operate hatcheries and/or use hatchery fish to mitigate for production deficiencies.

7.3 DEVELOP, IMPLEMENT AND EVALUATE SUPPLEMENTATION PLANS

7.3A Regional Assessment of Supplementation
The Regional Assessment of Supplementation Project was created in late 1990 to provide a comprehensive framework for supplementation--the practice of using carefully selected stocks of hatchery fish to "reseed" streams. The project is being carried out by technical representatives from the fishery managers, utilities, Bonneville, the Council and others. One of its products will be a recommended planning process. This process will include setting supplementation objectives in terms of post-release survival, reproductive success, long-term fitness and ecological interactions; analyzing benefits and risks; and developing monitoring strategies to contain risk. This project was completed in December 1992.

Bonneville
7.3A.1 Continue to fund workshops to assist agencies and tribes in understanding and using the planning concepts and guidelines developed by the Regional Assessment of Supplementation Project, particularly as they can be applied to updating subbasin plans. Continue to support the updating of the guidelines and further development of the ecosystem diagnosis and treatment method.

7.3B Final Planning and Implementation of Proposed Additional High Priority Supplementation Projects
For some time, the Council has urged the National Marine Fisheries Service to develop a clear policy to guide the use of supplementation. The fishery managers and the Council have developed and extensively reviewed a list of high priority supplementation projects from an original list of 19 proposed projects. The National Marine Fisheries Service has agreed to review these proposals on a case-by-case basis. Final planning is required to complete the necessary elements of the high priority supplementation projects before implementation. These projects will represent the first use and test of the Regional Assessment of Supplementation Project’s Planning Guidelines and the Supplementation Guidelines of the 1991 Integrated System Plan.

Fishery Managers
7.3B.1 Use the supplementation guidelines described in Chapter III.C of the 1991 Integrated System Plan and in Regional Assessment of Supplementation Project to prepare evaluations, biological risk assessments, and final plans for the high priority supplementation projects recommended by the fishery managers. Complete evaluations, biological risk assessments, and final plans by June 30, 1995.

7.3B.2 Absent Council disapproval of the final plans, implement the high priority supplementation projects including design, construction, operation, maintenance, monitoring and evaluation. Provide progress reports on the implementation of the projects.

National Marine Fisheries Service
7.3B.3 To facilitate appropriate coordination under the Endangered Species Act, the National Marine Fisheries Service should expeditiously review the high priority supplementation projects identified by the fishery managers and provide a clear schedule for completing its review and rendering a decision.

7.3B.4 Immediately complete analysis and provide Council with decision regarding policy for supplementation of weak Columbia River Basin salmon and steelhead populations. At the latest, provide policy by January 31, 1995.

Bonneville
7.3B.5 Fund the evaluation, biological risk assessment, and final planning of the high priority supplementation projects recommended by the fishery managers.

7.3B.6 Absent Council disapproval of the final plans, fund implementation of the supplementation projects including design, construction, operation, maintenance, monitoring and evaluation.

Hatchery Operators Not Funded by Bonneville
7.3B.7 Monitor and evaluate future and ongoing major supplementation activities to answer critical uncertainties. Use the Regional Assessment of Supplementation Project planning tools when planning new projects or reevaluating ongoing project objectives. Report to the Council on progress implementing this measure by June 1995.

Chelan County Public Utility District
7.3B.8 Upon approval from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Chelan County Public Utility District should fund design, construction, operation and maintenance of a hatchery program, including satellite facilities, for Rock Island Project in accordance with Section E "Hatchery-Based Compensation" of the Settlement Agreement dated April 24, 1987, filed in the relicensing proceeding for Project No. 943 and Docket Nos. E-9569, et al.

7.4 PURSUE NEW PRODUCTION INITIATIVES

7.4A Identify, Evaluate and Implement New Production Initiatives

Fishery Managers
7.4A.1 Use the Coordinated Habitat and Production process identified in Section 7.0 to identify, evaluate and implement new production initiatives. Such initiatives may include measures to address the needs of weak stocks, such as scientifically sound supplementation, restoration of eliminated populations, demonstrations of captive brood stock technology, cryopreservation, portable and low-capital techniques, acclimation, conversion of existing artificial production facilities and other approaches. Initiatives may also include actions to provide harvest opportunities in tributaries or other areas and to facilitate rebuilding of weak stocks.

Bonneville
7.4A.2 Should the Council determine that additional hatchery propagation facilities are required to compensate for fish losses caused by the hydropower system, Bonneville shall provide funds to design, construct, operate and maintain such facilities.

7.4B Develop Master Plans

Fishery Managers
7.4B.1 Because of the need to address potential conflicts among increased production, mixed-stock harvest, gene conservation, consistency with other plans and other objectives, the Council calls for detailed master plans where there is not a National Environmental Policy Act document that provides enough information to evaluate new artificial production projects. Below, the Council provides a suggested list of master plan elements. This list is intended to offer guidance, not to impose requirements. Not all of these elements may be relevant in all projects, and some unlisted elements may be important. In general, however, the following elements should be considered in the course of master planning:

· project goals;
· measurable and time-limited objectives;
· factors limiting production of the target species;
· expected project benefits (e.g., gene conservation, preservation of biological diversity, fishery enhancement and/or new information);
· alternatives for resolving the resource problem;
· rationale for the proposed project;
· how the proposed production project will maintain or sustain increases in production;
· the historical and current status of anadromous and resident fish in the subbasin;
· the current (and planned) management of anadromous and resident fish in the subbasin;
· consistency of proposed project with Council policies, National Marine Fisheries Service recovery plans, other fishery management plans, watershed plans and activities;
· potential impact of other recovery activities on project outcome;
· production objectives, methods and strategies;
· brood stock selection and acquisition strategies;
· rationale for the number and life-history stage of the fish to be stocked, particularly as they relate to the carrying capacity of the target stream and potential impact on other species;
· production profiles and release strategies;
· production policies and procedures;
· production management structure and process;
· related harvest plans;
· constraints and uncertainties, including genetic and ecological risk assessments and cumulative impacts;
· monitoring and evaluation plans, including a genetics monitoring program;
· conceptual design of the proposed production and monitoring facilities, including an assessment of the availability and utility of existing facilities; and
· cost estimates for various components, such as fish culture, facility design and construction, monitoring and evaluation, and operation and maintenance.

7.4C Emergency Cases

 Fishery Managers
7.4C.1 The Council recognizes that more immediate actions may be required for emergency cases, such as badly damaged populations with decreasing escapements. Documentation of the emergency nature of any such case and proposals for immediate production actions should be brought to the Council, which then will work with relevant parties to evaluate and initiate the necessary actions.

National Marine Fisheries Service
7.4C.2 At an early date, develop guidelines for determining when emergency actions, such as using captive brood stock or other emergency propagation, live trapping and transplantation technologies, should be used to aid in recovery of listed or potentially listed salmon and steelhead populations.

7.4D Captive Brood Stocks
Captive brood stock programs have the potential to rapidly increase adult fish numbers, while retaining genetic diversity of severely depleted wild or naturally spawning stocks of salmon. The captive brood stock concept differs from that used in conventional hatcheries in that fish of wild origin are maintained for a single generation in captivity. Their offspring are released to supplement wild and naturally spawning populations.

Implementation of captive brood stock programs may be the most effective means of accelerating recovery of severely depleted stocks. High survival from egg to adult and maintenance in captivity for no more than a single generation should ensure that genetic integrity and adaptability to native habitats are preserved. Even in a situation where barriers to survival were relaxed to the point that the population could double each generation, it is projected to take more than nine generations for a run to rebuild to the same number of spawners as could be provided by a captive brood stock program in one generation. Furthermore, stable egg supplies provided by a captive brood stock program should be a catalyst for habitat restoration and help ensure stock recovery.

Researchers have been developing basic captive brood stock methodologies for a number of years. Nevertheless, considerable technical information is required prior to implementation of large-scale captive brood stock programs.

National Marine Fisheries Service and Bonneville
7.4D.1 A scoping study identifying captive brood stock research needs is nearing completion. Upon completion of the scoping study, fund development of captive brood stock technology and implementation of captive brood stock programs to aid in recovery of severely depleted stocks of salmonids in the Columbia River Basin. Programs should be consistent with the products and conclusions of the genetics and natural production framework provided elsewhere in this section. Critical investigations that need to be funded concurrently include:

· review of the state of the art of captive brood stock management technology;
· development of genetically sound methods of sourcing and breeding brood stock to ensure genetic stability and gamete quality;
· modeling of genetic consequences of captive brood stock programs;
· development of captive brood stock culture systems that minimize loss of fish;
· development and testing of a model brood stock program;
· evaluation and comparison of fish husbandry techniques;
· evaluation of fish health problems;
· investigation of reproductive and non-reproductive physiology; and
· evaluation of fitness of captive brood progeny for supplementation.

7.4D.2 Fund captive brood stock demonstration projects identified under the coordinated habitat and production process.

7.4E Cryopreservation
Cryopreservation (preservation of fish gametes by freezing) has the potential of allowing "banking" of genetic stocks for future use, especially when the population is severely depleted and its habitat has been damaged or destroyed.

Federal and State Agencies
7.4E.1 In June 1995, report to the Council on research needed to improve cryopreservation technology and develop applications for helping to restore and preserve depleted populations.

7.4E.2 Fund needed research and demonstrations of cryopreservation identified in the coordinated habitat and production process.

7.4F Portable Facilities for Adult Salmon Collection and Holding, and for Juvenile Salmon Acclimation
As weak stocks or populations of salmon and steelhead are identified and assessed, supplementation will be one option to consider to help rebuild these stocks. Decentralized facilities to permit the capture and holding of brood stocks and facilities to acclimate the juvenile fish before release could be useful in this effort. The use of local brood stocks is fundamental to maintaining genetic diversity. The use of acclimation and release facilities prior to release is important to increase juvenile fish survival and ability to imprint on the release stream, and thereby reduce to natural levels their straying into other watersheds. The portability of these facilities should allow them to be used flexibly.

The demonstration project should involve only existing hatchery programs or fish populations that are currently being supplemented.

Bonneville
7.4F.1 Fund the planning, design, construction and operation of a demonstration project for the development of portable adult collection and holding facilities and juvenile acclimation and release facilities. The project should build on the earlier work funded by Bonneville and other relevant information and experience. The project should be initiated in 1991, with facilities in place in 1992. Report on this measure annually as part of report on measure 7.4O.1.

7.4F.2 Fund additional demonstration projects identified in the coordinated habitat and production process.

7.4O Small-Scale Production Projects
The major advantages of low-capital propagation are: 1) it requires a smaller water supply, and 2) it is readily adaptable to individual drainages, enabling the conservation of gene pools. The Council encourages community involvement in projects of this nature.

Bonneville
7.4O.1 Immediately, provide funds to develop and test low-cost, small-scale salmon and steelhead propagation facilities adaptable to Columbia River Basin locales. Include investigation of artificial spawning channels, on-site streamside incubators, acclimation ponds and other related technologies. Coordinate this work with portable acclimation facility demonstration projects in measure 7.4F. Report to the Council on this measure annually by June 30. As feasible approaches to low-cost, small-scale facilities are identified, take the steps necessary to use as many of these low-cost, small-scale facilities as required. In implementing this measure, put particular emphasis on implementing aspects of the updated subbasin plans including immediate needs for acclimation facilities.

^ top