The proponents answered the ISRP’s questions satisfactorily. Mostly the questions were more appropriate for other projects, not the Facilities Operations project. However, the proponents answered that (1) the program is taking a stepping stone approach toward developing segregated harvest and conservation stocks, (2) acclimation is widely accepted as effective, (3) a self sustaining natural population is a goal of the subbasin plan even though progress toward it is problematic, and (4) even if adequate harvest cannot be provided by a self sustaining natural population, harvest is a goal of artificial production.

This project is a large effort to produce, acclimate, and hold juvenile and adult Chinook, coho, and steelhead to support both conservation goals and harvest in the Umatilla River basin. The focus of the proposal is on the numbers of fish produced or held and outplanted, whereas the overall goal is to develop self-sustaining runs of anadromous salmonids which can sustain harvest. Verified tests were not apparent, such as whether holding juveniles increases survival and homing, or whether the overall goal of self-sustaining populations has been met, or will be in the future. Moreover, production of Harvest fish often far exceeds production of those for Conservation (e.g., of spring Chinook), which raises the question of whether these efforts are creating demand by fishers that cannot be met by self-sustaining runs in the future. A response is requested on the following four items: 1. Have there been tests of acclimation? Does holding juveniles at satellite sites actually increase survival and homing? 2. Will the goal of self sustaining populations be met in the future? Have the project’s efforts in acclimation and outplanting resulted in successful supplementation, i.e. naturalized spawning? 3. Will the demand for harvestable fish ever be met by self sustaining runs? 4. In “Response to Past ISRP and Council Comments and Recommendations” the proposal states that new information has been derived, and the program has been tuned to support goals of the co-managers through BMPs. The information has been presented by the Umatilla Hatchery M&E project. Has this information been presented in written reports? The ISRP review of the entire Umatilla program in 2006 (ISRP 2007-15) noted that the program had not achieved its salmon or steelhead goals for either escapement or harvest and raised the concern “whether the long-term fitness of the (steelhead) population that has been supplemented has deteriorated from interbreeding with fish that have had parents (or grandparents) reared in a hatchery.” The ISRP recommended that the hatchery production components of the program “consider modifying the spring Chinook and steelhead program goals and eliminating the fall Chinook program.” In response to this recommendation and in response to an HSRG review, the Umatilla program changed production methods in 2009 to create two groups of smolts, a “Conservation” group derived from natural origin returns and a “Harvest” group of smolts derived from hatchery origin returns. The two groups are to be reared and released at separate locations, the “Harvest” group low in the watershed where returning adults are expected to be vulnerable to fisheries and the “Conservation” group high in the watershed where returning adults are expected to be less vulnerable to fisheries and in better spawning habitat. The assumption is that the “Conservation” group, relatively relieved of harvest pressure and sustained primarily by natural origin returns, will over generations adapt to the habitat high in the watershed and ultimately naturalize as a self sustaining population in the river.