Show new navigation
On
Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program
Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program
RSS Feed for updates to Proposal RESCAT-2008-117-00 - Rufus Woods Net Pens Follow this via RSS feed. Help setting up RSS feeds?

Proposal Summary

Proposal RESCAT-2008-117-00 - Rufus Woods Net Pens

View the dynamic Proposal Summary

This Proposal Summary page updates dynamically to always display the latest data from the associated project and contracts. This means changes, like updating the Project Lead or other contacts, will be immediately reflected here.

Download a snapshot PDF

To view a point-in-time PDF snapshot of this page, select one of the Download links in the Proposal History section. These PDFs are created automatically by important events like submitting your proposal or responding to the ISRP. You can also create one at any time by using the PDF button, located next to the Expand All and Collapse All buttons.


Archive Date Time Type From To By
11/8/2011 1:20 PM Status Draft <System>
Download 11/29/2011 10:46 AM Status Draft ISRP - Pending First Review <System>
12/5/2011 12:10 PM Status ISRP - Pending First Review Draft <System>
Download 12/5/2011 1:14 PM Status Draft ISRP - Pending First Review <System>
2/16/2012 12:18 PM Status ISRP - Pending First Review ISRP - Pending Response <System>
Download 3/6/2012 2:32 PM Status ISRP - Pending Response ISRP - Pending Final Review <System>
4/17/2012 1:13 PM Status ISRP - Pending Final Review Pending Council Recommendation <System>
3/5/2014 2:23 PM Status Pending Council Recommendation Pending BPA Response <System>

This online form is dynamically updated with the most recent information. To view the content as reviewed by the ISRP and Council for this review cycle, download an archived PDF version using the Download link(s) above.

Proposal Number:
  RESCAT-2008-117-00
Proposal Status:
Pending BPA Response
Proposal Version:
Proposal Version 1
Review:
Resident Fish, Regional Coordination, and Data Management Category Review
Portfolio:
Resident Fish, Regional Coordination, and Data Management Categorical Review
Type:
Existing Project: 2008-117-00
Primary Contact:
Jill Phillips
Created:
11/8/2011 by (Not yet saved)
Proponent Organizations:
Colville Confederated Tribes

Project Title:
Rufus Woods Net Pens
 
Proposal Short Description:
The Rufus Woods Redband Net Pens project was developed as a cost effective alternative to rear large fish destined for Reservation waters and relieve pressure on the Colville Tribal Hatchery's resources. Fish produced from project are released into Lake Rufus Woods, a boundary water, and reservation lakes aimed at providing a successful subsistence fishery to tribal members and a recreational sport fishery to tribal and non-tribal member
 
Proposal Executive Summary:
The Colville Tribal Hatchery was built in 1989 and is over 20 years old. It was designed to produce 50,000 pounds of trout annually. Two additional permanent and two temporary raceways were constructed but no improvements or expansion was made to the water system. Consequently, insufficient water and space are available to meet all the diverse stocking requirements of boundary waters, lakes and streams on the Colville Reservation.
Several options for expanding facilities were investigated. It was concluded that the most practical and cost effective option was to contract with a local aquaculture facility to rear additional production and lessen the load on the hatchery and its water system. The primary goal of this project is to supplement hatchery production to assist in meeting resident fish stocking goals. Project provides more harvest opportunities to tribal members for subsistence and ceremonial use and provides a recreational sport fishery for tribal and non-tribal members alike.
The Rufus Woods Redband Net Pen project works jointly with the Colville Tribal Hatchery O & M (1985-038-00) and Rufus Woods Creel and Supplementation (2007-405-00) projects. All initial incubation and rearing occur at the tribal hatchery. Juvenile fish are reared and differentially marked at the hatchery according to program needs. Tag/marks are used to measure effectiveness of planting strategies, survival of year classes, and fall or spring entries. This gives managers the ability to understand the project's contribution to the fishery. Fish are programmed to enter pens at the beginning of May each year. Prior to fish entries, one of the two local aquaculture facilities will be contracted to rear these fish. Specific rearing guidelines and program goals are developed and communicated to contractor; project is monitored by hatchery manager. Population size samples are taken throughout growout period; records are monitored for accuracy to insure project goals are achieved. A portion of fish will be directly released into Lake Rufus Woods as needed to lighten rearing densities and provide harvest opportunities in reservation boundary waters according to management goals. In April, net pen fish will be transported by Hatchery Project staff and out planted into selected reservation lakes. Rufus Woods Creel and Supplementation (2007-405-00) project staff measure angling pressure and success. Colville Tribal Hatchery O & M (1985-038-00) project staff perform environmental measurements, gill net, creel and hydroacoustic surveys that are prioritized on key reservation waters to assist in determining the most effective and efficient use of production.

Purpose:
Artificial Production
Emphasis:
Harvest Augmentation
Species Benefit:
Anadromous: 0.0%   Resident: 100.0%   Wildlife: 0.0%
Supports 2009 NPCC Program:
No
Subbasin Plan:
Fish Accords:
  • Fish Accord - Colville
Biological Opinions:
None

Describe how you think your work relates to or implements regional documents including: the current Council’s 2014 Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program including subbasin plans, Council's 2017 Research Plan,  NOAA’s Recovery Plans, or regional plans. In your summary, it will be helpful for you to include page numbers from those documents; optional citation format).
Project Significance to Regional Programs: View instructions
Management decisions are based on the Colville Tribal Fish and Wildlife Management Plan as well as the local subbasin plan. The primary goal of the project is to support mitigation efforts from fish losses related to the construction and operation of Chief Joseph and Grand Coulee Dams. Project provides resident fish substitution for anadromous fish losses, providing more harvest opportunities for tribal membership and non-tribal members. Specific strategies cited in the San Poil Subbasin Plan include: (a) Whenever possible use locally adapted redband rainbow trout to supplement natural populations or harvest applications where emigration can occur. The Hatchery Project invested eight years in the development of a redband broodstock program for trout to be planted in Reservation Lakes. Investigations found no lake adapted stock were available on the Reservation. Fish taken from Bridge Creek were identified as redband were used toward broodstock program. Additional redband were received by WDFW and incorporated into broodstock program, later redband stock was determined to be mixed as Phalon Lake/S. Boulder Creek. These fish performed poorly in both the hatchery and Reservation Lakes, which ultimately limited harvest opportunities. Genetically, stock is not the best choice, especially for stream plants. The poor performance, limited harvest opportunities and genetic impact forced management to make the decision to phase out the redband broodstock program and use only sterile rainbow trout of more lake adapted stocks. In order to limit possible genetic impacts on local populations of redband trout, triploid rainbow trout from project will not be utilized toward stream plants.
In this section describe the specific problem or need your proposal addresses. Describe the background, history, and location of the problem. If this proposal is addressing new problems or needs, identify the work components addressing these and distinguish these from ongoing/past work. For projects conducting research or monitoring, identify the management questions the work intends to address and include a short scientific literature review covering the most significant previous work related to these questions. The purpose of the literature review is to place the proposed research or restoration activity in the larger context by describing work that has been done, what is known, and what remains to be known. Cite references here but fully describe them on the key project personnel page.
Problem Statement: View instructions

The Colville Tribal Hatchery was constructed in 1989 in order to raise fish for reservation streams and lakes to mitigate for fish loss due to the construction of Grand Coulee and Chief Joseph Dams.  It was designed to annually produce 50,000 pounds of production.  In 2002, the Colville Tribe began a commitment to replace coastal strains of rainbow trout with native redband rainbow trout (Arterburn, 2003).  The tribal hatchery began expanding rearing capacity this same year by adding two permanent and two temporary raceways, unfortunately no additional water resources where incorporated into expansion.  Juvenile redband collection began from Bridge Creek on the Colville Reservation and other redband were obtained from WDFW in 2003.  These fish became broodstock for the hatchery's new  program.  In 2009, all rainbow trout out-planted in reservation waters were a redband stock (Shallenberger, 2010).  The program seemed to be successful, however, it put a heavy strain on the hatchery's water resources and rearing space.  The facility was not designed to hold & rear broodstock from several year classes and also its 50,000 pounds of  annual production.  Alternatives were investigated to find a solution in relieving this additional pressure.  The most cost effective alternative was to contract with an existing local aquaculture facility that utilized a net pen system.  Originally, this project was focused on rearing broodstock and additional production to be directly distributed into Rufus Woods or out-planted as needed into reservation waters.  The 2011 high spring runoff  forced managers to make a critical decision to remove all fish from net pen site before high dissolved gas levels would compromise and/or become lethal to fish.  Half of the net pen production was outplanted into North & South Twin Lakes.  This created a very successful fishery that the two lakes have not seen in recent years. 

At the beginning of 2011, the Colville Tribes Fish & Wildlife Director, Resident Fish Division Manager, Fisheries Biologist and Hatchery Manager all met to discuss the redband rainbow trout program.  Several stock issues were brought forward and discussed. 

  1. Current redband broodstock is not representative of what was in reservation lakes.  Stock is of mixed origin from Bridge Creek (small stream on reservation) and WDFW Phalon Lake (mixed w/Boulder Creek stock). 
  2. They are out-planted as diploids.  At a conservation standpoint, this stock is a poor choice for genetic reasons (dilute genetic pool, introgression, hydridization).
  3. Redband stock has demonstrated poor performance in Lakes.  M & E data shows poor growth, mortality is typical of other domestic stocks but, they tend to emigrate out of lake.  Difficult to manage fishery if they are moving out into tributary streams. 
  4. Redband are spring spawners.  They demonstrate dark body coloration, kipe snouts and are in poor shape when they are out-planted in the spring.  This does not assist in their already poor performance in the lake environments.
  5. At the hatchery, the redband stock has also showed poor performance compared to more domesticated rainbow stocks.  Redband demonstrated a 30% higher susceptibility to cold water bacteria,  redbands required 35% more rearing space than a more domesticated stocks and feed conversion rates were approximately 25% higher than domestic stocks.

The decision was made to transition away from the mixed redband stock and utilize a more domesticated  lake adaptive stock for the hatchery's rainbow trout program.  


What are the ultimate ecological objectives of your project?

Examples include:

Monitoring the status and trend of the spawner abundance of a salmonid population; Increasing harvest; Restoring or protecting a certain population; or Maintaining species diversity. A Project Objective should provide a biological and/or physical habitat benchmark by which results can be evaluated. Objectives should be stated in terms of desired outcomes, rather than as statements of methods and work elements (tasks). In addition, define the success criteria by which you will determine if you have met your objectives. Later, you will be asked to link these Objectives to Deliverables and Work Elements.
Objectives: View instructions
Supplement fishery to provide harvest and recreational opportunities for tribal and non-tribal members. (OBJ-1)
Project is aimed at providing harvestable fish to supplement reservation waters
in an effort to provide tribal members with a successful subsistence and recreational fishery. Project also provides additional opportunities for a recreational non-member sport fishery.

Increase efficiency and decrease the cost to rear a pound of fish (OBJ-2)
Net pens provide an efficient alternative to rear and provide larger fish to meet Reservation stocking needs. By producing more pounds of production at net pens, cost per pound decreases.

Relieve Pressure on the Colville Tribal Hatchery resources (OBJ-3)
Project assists in relieving pressure on the Colville Tribal Hatchery's resources by rearing a component of production off-site.


The table content is updated frequently and thus contains more recent information than what was in the original proposal reviewed by ISRP and Council.

Summary of Budgets

To view all expenditures for all fiscal years, click "Project Exp. by FY"

To see more detailed project budget information, please visit the "Project Budget" page

Expense SOY Budget Working Budget Expenditures *
FY2019 $0 $0

FY2020 $0 $0

FY2021 $0 $0

FY2022 $0 $0

FY2023 $0 $0

FY2024 $0 $0

FY2025 $0 $0

* Expenditures data includes accruals and are based on data through 31-Mar-2025

Actual Project Cost Share

The table content is updated frequently and thus contains more recent information than what was in the original proposal reviewed by ISRP and Council.

Current Fiscal Year — 2025
Cost Share Partner Total Proposed Contribution Total Confirmed Contribution
There are no project cost share contributions to show.
Previous Fiscal Years
Fiscal Year Total Contributions % of Budget
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010

Discuss your project's recent Financial performance shown above. Please explain any significant differences between your Working Budget, Contracted Amount and Expenditures. If Confirmed Cost Share Contributions are significantly different than Proposed cost share contributions, please explain.
Explanation of Recent Financial Performance: View instructions
Contract dates were changed to better reflect project operations. Performance in the first year shows project was less than 5% under spent of total budget. Beginning in 2011 and continuing through 2017, BPA approved a 2.5% COLA. Additional funds were brought into project in 2012 to address COLA, increased benefits and salary costs. Current expeditures are right on track.
Discuss your project's historical financial performance, going back to its inception. Include a brief recap of your project's expenditures by fiscal year. If appropriate discuss this in the context of your project's various phases.
Explanation of Financial History: View instructions
This project is fairly new and completed its first contract in FY2010. FY2010, had a working budget of $166,875 and underspent it by less than 5%, normal operations. FY 2011, working budget of $204,137, on track with current expeditures. Extended approved contract dates from 2/1/2011 to 4/30/12. FY2013, working budget of $167,163, planning to add additional funding to expand project.

Annual Progress Reports
Expected (since FY2004):5
Completed:5
On time:5
Status Reports
Completed:24
On time:21
Avg Days Early:2

                Count of Contract Deliverables
Earliest Contract Subsequent Contracts Title Contractor Earliest Start Latest End Latest Status Accepted Reports Complete Green Yellow Red Total % Green and Complete Canceled
45865 51235, 57082, 61175, 65059 2008-117-00 RUFUS WOODS REDBAND NET PENS Colville Confederated Tribes 02/01/2010 04/30/2015 History 24 24 0 0 1 25 96.00% 0
Project Totals 24 24 0 0 1 25 96.00% 0

Selected Contracted Deliverables in CBFish (2004 to present)

The contracted deliverables listed below have been selected by the proponent as demonstrative of this project's major accomplishments.

Contract WE Ref Contracted Deliverable Title Due Completed
51235 E: 132 Attach Progress Report in Pisces 9/15/2011 9/15/2011

View full Project Summary report (lists all Contracted Deliverables and Quantitative Metrics)

Discuss your project's contracted deliverable history (from Pisces). If it has a high number of Red deliverables, please explain. Most projects will not have 100% completion of deliverables since most have at least one active ("Issued") or Pending contract. Also discuss your project's history in terms of providing timely Annual Progress Reports (aka Scientific/Technical reports) and Pisces Status Reports. If you think your contracted deliverable performance has been stellar, you can say that too.
Explanation of Performance: View instructions
Original contract dates on FY 2010 were not reflective of the net pen rearing cycle, typically May through April. It was agreed to extend contract dates as a no cost extention on FY 2011 contract. Some deliverables in FY 2010 & FY 2011 were marked red because of contract date issues.

  • Please do the following to help the ISRP and Council assess project performance:
  • List important activities and then report results.
  • List each objective and summarize accomplishments and results for each one, including the projects previous objectives. If the objectives were not met, were changed, or dropped, please explain why. For research projects, list hypotheses that have been and will be tested.
  • Whenever possible, describe results in terms of the quantifiable biological and physical habitat objectives of the Fish and Wildlife Program, i.e., benefit to fish and wildlife or to the ecosystems that sustain them. Include summary tables and graphs of key metrics showing trends. Summarize and cite (with links when available) your annual reports, peer reviewed papers, and other technical documents. If another project tracks physical habitat or biological information related to your project’s actions please summarize and expand on, as necessary, the results and evaluation conducted under that project that apply to your project, and cite that project briefly here and fully in the Relationships section below. Research or M&E projects that have existed for a significant period should, besides showing accumulated data, also present statistical analyses and conclusions based on those data. Also, summarize the project’s influence on resource management and other economic or social benefits. Expand as needed in the Adaptive Management section below. The ISRP will use this information in its Retrospective Review of prior year results. If your proposal is for continuation of work, your proposal should focus on updating this section. If yours is an umbrella project, click here for additional instructions. Clearly report the impacts of your project, what you have learned, not just what you did.
All Proposals: View instructions
  • For umbrella projects, the following information should also be included in this section:
  • a. Provide a list of project actions to date. Include background information on the recipients of funding, including organization name and mission, project cost, project title, location and short project summary, and implementation timeline.
  • b. Describe how the restoration actions were selected for implementation, the process and criteria used, and their relative rank. Were these the highest priority actions? If not, please explain why?
  • c. Describe the process to document progress toward meeting the program’s objectives in the implementation of the suite of projects to date. Describe this in terms of landscape-level improvements in limiting factors and response of the focal species.
  • d. Where are project results reported (e.g. Pisces, report repository, database)? Is progress toward program objectives tracked in a database, report, indicator, or other format? Can project data be incorporated into regional databases that may be of interest to other projects?
  • e. Who is responsible for the final reporting and data management?
  • f. Describe problems encountered, lessons learned, and any data collected, that will inform adaptive management or influence program priorities.
Umbrella Proposals: View instructions

The Rufus Woods Redband Net Pen Project Progress Report summarizes the first rearing cycle of project (Phillips, J., 2011).  

In 2010, the Rufus Woods Redband Net Pen project began.  The Colville Tribal Fish Hatchery staff reared, marked and transported a total of 49,938 juvenile redband rainbow trout at 22 grams or 1,099 kg into the net pen site on June 9, 2010.  Pacific Aquaculture (PA), a division of Pacific Seafoods, was contracted to rear these fish and was required to submit monthly reports documenting fish sample size(s), mortality, net pen biomass and feed records to project lead.  PA also provided transportation via boat to net pen site and assisted Hatchery Project staff with fish out plants and direct releases.  Hatchery Project staff coordination was essential in outplanting all the remaining fish before severe spring runoff in 2011 caused any negative effects.  The management decision to remove or direct plant all fish from pens was a good decision.  The Total Dissolved Gas Pressure (TDGP) in the Columbia River exceeded 130% and caused high fish mortality in both of the local net pen facilities (Bill Clark and David Delano, personal communication ).

Results: 

  1. The project successfully reared and released over 16,960 kg. of redband rainbow trout into Lake Rufus Woods, North Twin and South Twin Lakes in it's first year of implementation (Table 1).  Providing harvestable fish to supplement reservation waters in an effort to provide tribal members with a successful subsistence and recreational fishery. Project also provided additional opportunities for a recreational non-member sport fishery. 
  2. Although project was successful, redband stock demonstrated poor feed conversion rates.  A domesticated Washington stock of rainbow trout, such as Goldendale or Spokane, can typically achieve a FCR of 1.0 - 1.25 for a targeted fish size of 1 to 2 pounds. The final biological FCR for this group of fish ended up at 2.51.  
  3. Even though the FCR was twice as high than expected,  associated project costs calculated out to be less than a quarter of what it would cost to raise these same fish at the hatchery.  This demonstrates the projects ability to rear large fish or more pounds more cost effectively.  Expanding project's annual production goal and using a triploid rainbow stock that has a proven FCR of 1:1 will further increase project's efficiency and lower the cost of producing a pound of fish. 
  4. Pacific Aquaculture documented 1,509 mortalities from June 9 through May 3, 2010.   Final production and mortality numbers documented a shortage of  > 9,300 fish.  Looking at current project mortality trends, it is believed PA's mortality records were incomplete or not entirely accurate.

 

Table 1. Number of mortalities, weight (g), and total number of redband rainbow trout that were out-planted.  Out-plant locations are Rufus Woods (R.W.), North Twin (N.Twin) & South Twin (S. Twin) Lakes

Date:

Mortality

Mort Wt. (Kg)

Weight (g)

Fish Out-Planted

Out-Planted Wt. (Kg)

Out-Plant Location

BALANCE

             

49,938

8/1/10 to 12/25/10

1272

407

320

     

48,666

12/26/10 to 3/19/11

45

18

400

     

48,621

3/25/2011

   

439

4,965

2,179.6

R.W.

43,656

4/5/2011

   

545

5,219

2,844.4

R.W.

38,437

4/19/2011

40

16.2

405

5,697

2,307.3

N.Twin

32,700

4/20/2011

20

8.5

428

2,592

1,109.4

N.Twin

30,088

4/22/2011

35

12.9

369

2,993

1,104.4

S. Twin

27,060

4/25/2011

12

5.1

432

2,765

1,194.5

S. Twin

24,283

4/26/2011

52

22.2

428

2,852

1,220.7

S. Twin

21,379

4/27/2011

21

8.9

424

2,638

1,118.5

S. Twin

18,720

4/27/2011

   

424

1,740

737.8

N.Twin

16,980

5/3/2011

12

4.9

413

7,614

3,144.6

R.W.

9,354

Totals

1509

   

39,075

16,961.1

   

 The project successfully reared and released over 16,960 kg. of redband rainbow trout into Rufus Woods and reservation lakes.  This amount constitutes 76% of the Colville Tribal Resident Fish Hatchery’s annual production goal (Shallenberger, E., 2010).  Associated project costs calculated out to be less than a quarter of what it would cost to raise these fish at the hatchery.  The project has provided a cost effective way to grow much larger fish, alleviate some pressure on the hatchery’s current resources and provided a wonderful spring fishery on North and South Twin Lakes and Lake Rufus Woods.

 



The table content is updated frequently and thus contains more recent information than what was in the original proposal reviewed by ISRP and Council.

Review: Resident Fish, Regional Coordination, and Data Management Category Review

Council Recommendation

Assessment Number: 2008-117-00-NPCC-20111205
Project: 2008-117-00 - Rufus Woods Redband Net Pens
Review: Resident Fish, Regional Coordination, and Data Management Category Review
Proposal: RESCAT-2008-117-00
Proposal State: Pending BPA Response
Approved Date: 3/5/2014
Recommendation: Implement with Conditions
Comments: Implement with conditions through FY2014. Sponsor to develop a trout stocking plan, including project specific concerns, as described by the ISRP, prior to FY2015. Funding recommendation beyond FY2014 based on favorable ISRP and Council review of the trout stocking plan.

Independent Scientific Review Panel Assessment

Assessment Number: 2008-117-00-ISRP-20120215
Project: 2008-117-00 - Rufus Woods Redband Net Pens
Review: Resident Fish, Regional Coordination, and Data Management Category Review
Proposal Number: RESCAT-2008-117-00
Completed Date: 4/17/2012
Final Round ISRP Date: 4/3/2012
Final Round ISRP Rating: Does Not Meet Scientific Review Criteria
Final Round ISRP Comment:

The recommendation is for Colville Hatchery Operation and Maintenance (198503800) and Rufus Woods Redband Net Pens (200811700). The comments apply to both proposals, although specific comments on the progression of the Net Pens project are provided below.

The ISRP appreciates the effort the Colville Tribal Fisheries staff put into the response to the ISRP’s preliminary review of the Colville Tribal Hatchery and the Rufus Woods net pen proposals. The sponsors provided an informal description of the resident trout and net pen programs while attempting to address the ISRP questions. A number of questions from the ISRP’s preliminary review were addressed, and the panel is better able to understand the scope and details of the project. While the information was interesting, the presentation does not allow one to evaluate the recent performance of the program in terms of harvests by tribal members in relation to numbers of eggs brought into culture and fish stocked in reservation waters. 

The sponsor needs to develop a trout stocking master plan which guides the annual stocking, provides a basis for Fish and Wildlife Program proposal review, and provides for evaluation of the success of the program. The plan should generally include information requested in Three Step Master Plans for anadromous hatcheries. The plan should critique the resident fish hatchery program for its ability to provide catchable trout on the reservation while demonstrating efficient and productive practices. The plan should develop hatchery and harvest goals and collect information to evaluate whether these goals are being met. Some documentation of fishing effort is needed on each lake that is stocked; otherwise it is impossible to determine whether the effort is worthwhile. This plan should incorporate the Rufus Woods net pen project and fish purchased and released under the Rufus Woods Habitat/Passage Improvement, Creel, and Triploid Supplementation (200740500).

The ISRP finds that the project does not meet specific review criteria established by the 1996 amendment to the Power Act for NW Power and Conservation Council Fish and Wildlife Program. Those criteria state that projects: 1) are based on sound science principles; 2) benefit fish and wildlife; 3) have clearly defined objectives and outcomes; and 4) have provisions for monitoring and evaluation of results. In particular, documentation addressing ISRP review criteria 1, 3, and 4 are not evident in the proposal, annual reports, or response.

Projects are based on sound science principals. The ISRP is unable to conclude the stocking regime for each body of water has a defensible scientific rationale. Table 7 of the response to the ISRP lists each body of water and identifies the number of fish stocked of each species in 2011, and identifies potential problems in the lakes and streams. A plan is needed that identifies the different species, their size, and their numbers, that could potentially be stocked in each lake or stream and a justification for those species, numbers, and sizes based on empirical stock recruitment information from the lake or stream. The narrative provided in the proposal suggests that some biological information is used to establish a stocking program, but the decision framework is never presented. Stocking brook trout in North and South Twin Lake is an example of the stocking that is inadequately justified. The proposal states that self-sustaining populations of brook trout occupy these lakes. No stock recruitment or harvest data are provided to indicate that hatchery fish are necessary to provide a fishery. What factors led to the stocking of about one million trout into the relatively small Twin Lakes in 2009? What is the justification for the proposed increased of stocked large triploid trout in Rufus Woods Reservoir from 20,000 to 60,000 fish, and what information is available that these additional fish have minimal effects on native fishes. Stocking catchable rainbow trout in streams based on pre-stocking electrofishing surveys of abundance is another example. The justification for why a specific abundance level triggers additional stocking is not provided. Documentation of the stocking decision framework is important for informing future managers in addition to informing this review by the ISRP. Additionally, fish rearing protocols at the net pens should be documented.

The basis for raising specific number of fish and stocking them into the reservation water bodies needs justification beyond the obvious need to provide resident fish harvests for tribal members. The program should demonstrate that its operations are effective and efficient in achieving the ultimate goal of providing harvests. 

Projects have clearly defined objectives and outcomes. The ISRP expects there will be established standards for hatchery and net pen production (egg take, eyed egg success, hatching success, and numbers released) for each species, and that the program will explicitly self-evaluate to those established benchmarks. The ISRP expects there will be standards established for fishery yields (CPUE, total harvest in relation to fish stocked, economic and other social benefits) for each body of water and the project as a whole. These standards should be consistent with types of data that can be collected. For example, if CPUE is measured in terms of fish per angler per day, then the standard should also be set using fish per angler per day. Although some fishery goals and evaluation were provided for the net pen project, others were incomplete. 

Projects have provisions for monitoring and evaluation. The ISRP concludes a sufficient monitoring program is not in place. A defined and statistically justified M&E plan is required for the resident fish stocking program that addresses both the biological/chemical/food-web and harvest factors. The ISRP understands and appreciates the difficulty in conducting direct creel surveys in small, remote lakes and streams. Nonetheless, the ISRP believes that effort needs to be made to better document the use of these lakes and the harvest of fish for the intended purpose of recreational angling or subsistence fishing. The documentation may need to use interview and survey techniques from the social science realm rather than the fisheries field.

The ISRP expresses concern about the fish culture performance at the hatchery. Hatchery performance data were provided by the sponsor that raised questions, yet there was no evaluation of these production numbers by the sponsors. Table 4 in the response to the ISRP summarizes egg take, eyed eggs, fish ponded, and fish released for brook trout, Lahontan cutthroat trout, rainbow trout, and redband rainbow trout. For brook trout and Lahontan cutthroat trout, the average percent eye-up for the past seven years has been 67% and 54% respectively, and survival to release has been only 36% and 30% respectively.For rainbow trout from Washington Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, the survival from green egg to release averaged only 25% for brood years 2006 and 2007. This level of success in the fish-rearing phase of the program is in need of investigation and improvement. Also, why does the number of green eggs vary so much within a species from year to year? The ISRP acknowledges the information provided on water supply challenges. The hatchery production program should be designed around water supply constraints.

The ISRP previously concluded in 2009 that the Rufus Woods Redband Net Pen Project met scientific review criteria with the qualifications that the project be designed as a proof-of-concept test for native redband brood fish management, and that future proposals identify goals and monitoring results that are integrated with the overall Colville resident fish hatchery program. The current proposal indicated that net pen culture of redband trout did not meet the Tribe’s needs (see statement below).Although the net pen proposal identified some goals, for example harvest 30% of stocked fish, and provided some observations this information was incomplete, as noted above. 

The current proposal reflects major changes in the Rufus Woods Redband Net Pens (200811700) project direction. The original proposal was for rearing redband trout broodstock, and actual stocking of production fish was a minor element with numbers and locations of fish to be stocked unidentified. The sponsor has suggested that redband trout are not suitable for stocking in reservation lakes and perform poorly in the tribal hatchery, although conflicting statements were also provided in the proposal: “The project successfully reared and released over 16,960 kg of redband rainbow trout into Rufus Woods and reservation lakes. This amount constitutes 76% of the Colville Tribal Resident Fish Hatchery’s annual production goal (Shallenberger, E., 2010). Associated project costs calculated out to be less than a quarter of what it would cost to raise these fish at the hatchery. The project has provided a cost effective way to grow much larger fish, alleviate some pressure on the hatchery’s current resources and provided a wonderful spring fishery on North and South Twin Lakes and Lake Rufus Woods.” Nevertheless, the sponsor has transitioned this project from rearing redband broodstock to rearing triploid rainbow trout for direct stocking into Lake Rufus Woods, North and South Twin Lakes, and unspecified reservation streams. Justification for this production is needed in a Master Plan. The ISRP is unable to determine why triploid rainbow trout from the net pens are needed for Lake Rufus Woods since project 200740500 is purchasing triploid fish from net pen operators for stocking.

ISRP Retrospective Evaluation of Results

The original goal of the Rufus Woods Net Pens project (200811700) was to raise native redband trout broodstock and reduce capacity issues at the Colville Tribal Hatchery. After implementing the project, the sponsor stated that “the project successfully reared and released over 16,960 kg of redband rainbow trout into Rufus Woods and reservation lakes. This amount constitutes 76% of the Colville Tribal Resident Fish Hatchery’s annual production goal (Shallenberger, E., 2010). Associated project costs calculated out to be less than a quarter of what it would cost to raise these fish at the hatchery. The project has provided a cost effective way to grow much larger fish, alleviate some pressure on the hatchery’s current resources and provided a wonderful spring fishery on North and South Twin Lakes and Lake Rufus Woods.” Nevertheless, in the most recent proposal, the sponsor concluded that the performance of redband trout in the hatchery and Rufus Woods net pens was insufficient to meet program needs. Stocking native redband trout was deleted as a key objective in the 2011 proposal.

The project has transitioned to rearing and releasing triploid rainbow trout. The goal in 2011 was to release 20,000 large triploid trout into the Twin Lakes and 20,000 trout into Rufus Woods for tribal and sport harvests. A reported 10,000 trout were stocked into South Twin Lake, but no values were presented for North Twin Lake or Rufus Woods. In 2011, approximately 1,769 rainbow trout were harvested in Rufus Woods and 15,477 trout were captured in the Twin Lakes. This project needs to be incorporated into a resident fish hatchery Master Plan, improve upon its stocking plan, and carefully evaluate whether the project is achieving specific goals such as catch per hour or percentage of stocked fish harvested.

 

First Round ISRP Date: 2/8/2012
First Round ISRP Rating: Response Requested
First Round ISRP Comment:

The proposal needs major revision including:

  1. an expanded explanation of significance to regional programs/plans
  2. a revised technical background giving a more complete history of lost fisheries and the need for resident fish substitution
  3. objectives that are specific and measurable
  4. deliverables and work elements that specifically describe the tasks needed to meet objectives
  5. detailed methods for raising the net pen fish or a sub-contractors specifications and methods
  6. a description of the evaluation and decision framework used to establish stocking location and numbers, and how this stocking is integrated in the Colville Tribal Hatchery rearing and stocking plans.

See the ISRP’s programmatic comments on fish stocking.

The Council’s 1999 Artificial Production Review (NWPCC 1999-15) established that evaluating hatcheries based on numbers or pounds of fish produced and released was inadequate and that goals and objectives were required for post-release performance. The ISRP looks for clear metrics for performance in the hatchery or net pen including in-pen survival and growth, disease monitoring or other health inspections, percentage of triploid trout, net pen water quality compliance inspections, and food conversion as well as post-release performance including survival for stated intervals, harvest, and fish condition. These should be identified and reported for the time period since the last ISRP review. The Rufus Woods net pen project provided data for in-pen survival and growth, but there was no information on survival and harvests of these fish in Twin Lakes and Rufus Woods. The proposal should also identify impacts of the stocked fish on resident fishes in each of the receiving waters, including elevated harvest rates on native trout in response to higher fishing effort for example in Rufus Woods. The ISRP understands that post release data may come from other projects, but the information should be summarized in the net pen proposal.

1. Purpose: Significance to Regional Programs, Technical Background, and Objectives

Significance to Regional Programs: Insufficient information was provided. The proposal identifies that the CCT Fish Management Plan includes elements that the project fulfills, but those elements should be described. The linkages to elements in subbasin plans beyond the San Poil are likely since fish are intended for release in Lake Rufus Woods. The proposal should identify how it is linked to other relevant regional planning efforts such as the Lake Roosevelt Guiding Document, the Lake Roosevelt Fisheries Evaluation Project, and the Council’s Fish and Wildlife Program. Additionally, the numbers of fish to be purchased and released into Lake Rufus Woods by this project should be described. Interactions with the Lake Rufus Woods Creel and Supplementation (2007-405-00) project and the Resident Fish above Chief Joseph and Grand Coulee Dams (1997-004-00) need to be stated. 

Technical Background: Insufficient information is provided. The sponsor states the program provides subsistence and recreational trout fishing opportunities to substitute for lost anadromous fishing. This overarching purpose is fine. The technical background does not provide sufficient information on the specific lakes on the Colville Reservation that might be stocked using fish from this project. A decision framework, for example a regional resident fish stocking plan, that identifies the policy and scientific guidance from tribal management plans to direct the annual stocking is needed. This framework should be described in a comprehensive residence fish stocking plan that encompasses all hatchery activities in the upper Columbia region. A brief description with references of lost anadromous fisheries is needed to demonstrate the need for the resident fish substitution.

Objectives: Incomplete information is provided. There are three objectives identified: supplement fishery to provide harvest; increase efficiency and decrease the cost; relieve pressure on Colville Tribal Hatchery. These objectives need quantitative standards identified as goals that can be evaluated by metrics. There are no quantitative objectives for fish rearing success or for subsequent harvest. There should be quantitative objectives for fish harvesting metrics such as catch per effort, total harvest, angler days, and angler satisfaction as well as quantitative objectives for fish growth and survival. None are provided in the proposal. Monitoring is needed to evaluate whether the objectives are achieved.

2. History: Accomplishments, Results, and Adaptive Management (ISRP Review of Results)

Accomplishments: The project has one year of fish rearing experience from net pens stocked with 22g redband trout in June 2010 and released fish in the spring of 2011, under emergency circumstances because of gas super-saturation. Accurate estimates of survival are needed and observed survival should be compared with a goal in order to evaluate effectiveness of net pen rearing. The proposal did not describe whether or not juvenile fish, presumably rainbow trout, were stocked into net pens during the spring/summer of 2011 for release in 2012. No information is provided on harvest from the fish stocked.

Adaptive management: The evaluation of redband trout culture and switch from redband trout to triploid rainbow trout was provided as a management response.

ISRP Retrospective Evaluation of Results

The first year of operation (2010) determined that the performance of redband trout in the hatchery and Rufus Woods net pens was insufficient to meet program needs. The project plans to transition to rainbow trout, but no information on rainbow trout net pen operations was provided for 2011.

3. Project Relationships, Emerging Limiting Factors, and Tailored Questions for Type of Work (hatchery, RME, tagging)

Project Relationships: The proposal notes that the Rufus Woods Net Pen Project works directly with the Colville Hatchery O&M (#1985-038-00) and Rufus Woods Creel and Supplementation (#2007-405-00). However, the project also interacts with the Twin Lakes oxygenation project and Resident Fish above Chief Joseph and Grand Coulee Dams (#1997-004-00). The full scope of the interactions is not clear and needs to be better established. The relationship of this project to Tribal management outside of the BPA scope is not discussed. BPA funded trout rearing and stocking projects implemented by other sponsors are not identified. Standards for fish release, yield in fisheries, disease management, etc. established by the State of Washington, that may apply to this project are not discussed.

Emerging limiting factors: The proposal focuses primarily on limnological conditions, dissolved gas in Lake Rufus Woods and fish health concerns during net-pen rearing. Both of these limits need to be discussed in more detail in the problem statement and/or accomplishments section. The brief discussion of the health issues, in addition to dissolved gas, needs additional details.

Tailored Questions: Adequately answered and discussed.

4. Deliverables, Work Elements, Metrics, and Methods

The general description of the primary deliverable consisting of purchasing triploid trout eggs from WDFW, hatching eggs and rearing fish to 22g, and then contracting for rearing to catchable size for a put-and-take fishery is clear. There needs to be quantifiable elements attached to the deliverables. For example, the explanation of how the deliverables meet the objectives needs additional detail. How will objectives 2 and 3 be evaluated, and what is the threshold for success?

4a. Specific comments on protocols and methods described in MonitoringMethods.org

Apparently, no protocols or methods were submitted to MonitoringMethods.org.

Modified by Dal Marsters on 4/17/2012 1:13:29 PM.
Documentation Links:
  • Proponent Response (3/6/2012)
Review: Fish Accord ISRP Review

Independent Scientific Review Panel Assessment

Assessment Number: 2008-117-00-ISRP-20100323
Project: 2008-117-00 - Rufus Woods Redband Net Pens
Review: Fish Accord ISRP Review
Completed Date: None
First Round ISRP Date: 7/23/2009
First Round ISRP Rating: Meets Scientific Review Criteria (Qualified)
First Round ISRP Comment:

The qualification is that, in future proposals, integration and linkage with the Colville Hatchery Project should be demonstrated with sufficient detail. Moreover, the proposed approach should be set up and considered a proof-of-concept test for a native brood fish management effort. See the attached memo for details.

Documentation Links:
Explain how your project has responded to the above ISRP and Council qualifications, conditions, or recommendations. This is especially important if your project received a "Qualified" rating from the ISRP in your most recent assessment. Even if your project received favorable ratings from both the ISRP and Council, please respond to any issues they may have raised.
Response to past ISRP and Council comments and recommendations: View instructions
The ISRP noted in future proposals, integration and linkage with the Colville Hatchery Project and other projects should be demonstrated with sufficient detail. The coordination and relationship with each project is crucial to ensure the efficiency and success of the Rufus Woods Net Pen project. The Colville Hatchery Project (1985-038-00) rears, marks/tags, transports, assists in out-planting, performs monitoring and evaluation through lake, stream &amp; creel surveys and documents all fish planted from net pen project in its annual report. The Rufus Woods Supplementation and Creel Project (2007-405-00) assists in evaluating the projects success from direct plants into Lake Rufus Woods, with creel data collection. The Twin Lakes Enhancement Project (2008-111-00) primary goal is to improve summer habitat in the reservation lakes by increasing dissolved oxygen levels in the hypolimnion, providing more available habitat for fish use. By providing more available habitat for fish to utilize, out-plants from the net pens have a better chance at successfully entering the targeted fishery, or a small percentage of a &quot;carry over&quot; fishery. If this current coordination between projects did not exist, the cost to raise fish on the Rufus Woods Net Pen project would not be as economically feasible and project would not be as efficient.<br/> ISRP&#39;s overall comments were positive, commending the Colville Tribe in their efforts on redband rainbow trout. ISRP agreed the Colville Tribal Hatchery&#39;s rearing facilities would be more efficient if net pens were utilized to rear larger fish. The panel also noted the potential to expand project to increase numbers or pounds of out-planted fish as needed upon assessment of carrying capacity of each lake or stream.


Project Level: Please discuss how you’ve changed your project (objectives, actions, etc) based on biological responses or information gained from project actions; because of management decisions at the subbasin state, regional, or agency level; or by external or larger environment factors. Specifically, regarding project modifications summarize how previous hypotheses and methods are changed or improved in this updated proposal. This would include project modifications based on information from recent research and literature. How is your new work different than previous work, and why?
Management Level: Please describe any management changes planned or made because of biological responses or information gained from project actions. This would include management decisions at the subbasin, state, or regional level influenced by project results.
Management Changes: View instructions
The greatest management change was transitioning from redband rainbow trout to triploided Spokane stock. The original hypothesis was that redbands would have better survival in Reservation Lakes then more domesticated coastal stocks. Reservation Lakes frequently have a very warm (>20C) epilimnion, a narrow metalimnion and an anoxic hypolimnion, resulting in a summer time "habitat squeeze." It was theorized that since redbands evolved east of the Cascade Mountains they would be better adapted to these conditions. As it turned out the hypothesis that redbands would have better survival than the previously stocked rainbow trout was false (Shallenberger, 2011). In 2002, the Colville Tribe made a commitment to replace all coastal strains of rainbow trout with a redband rainbow stock (Arterburn, 2003). Investigations showed no lakes on the Colville Reservation with a population of redbands. In 2003, the Colville Tribal Hatchery began developing a captive redband broodstock program by collecting juvenile fish from Bridge Creek (on Reservation) and acquiring Phalon Lake (S. Boulder Creek) stock from WDFW. Each year approximately 100 additional fish were collected from Reservation streams, genetically tested and added to the broodstock program (Shallenberger, personal communication). Redbands were out-planted in 2006 and increased each year until 2009 when 100% of the rainbow trout planted were redbands. Fish planted into Twin Lakes were marked with elastomer tags, coded wire tags or adipose clips so that different stocks could later be identified in creel and gill net surveys. In 2010 and 2011 nearly 100% of the carryover fish seen in both gill net and creel surveys were the Goldendale stock of rainbow trout last planted in 2008. Outmigration through the Stranger Creek Dam was substantial in 2010, but was reduced in 2011 with a barrier net. In previous years outmigration of the Goldendale stock was minimal (Shallenberger, personal comm.). Performance of redbands at the hatchery also proved to be inferior to that of Goldendale or Spokane stocks that had been previously used. Redbands were 30% more susceptible to cold water disease, required 35% more rearing space, had up to 50% poorer feed conversion and showed poorer growth. Because of poor performance both in the hatchery and in Reservation Lakes it was concluded that Tribal fishery goals were not being met with redbands and the Tribe would be better off using triploided Spokane stock of rainbow trout available from WDFW. WDFW Fish Division Manager assures the Colville Tribe that Spokane stock will be available indefinitely. Although development of a redband broodstock program to supplement all rainbow trout hatchery production for reservation lakes and streams was not completely successful, the Colville Tribe has not completely abandoned the native redband stock. The Colville Tribe's Resident Fish Division will continue to enhance and perpetuate native redband rainbow trout populations through habitat improvements on projects such as Lake Roosevelt Rainbow Trout Habitat and Passage Improvement (1990-018-00) The decision to transition away from using a redband stock was discussed in detail with project COTR, Carlos Matthew. During discussions, it was suggested the project name should change from Rufus Woods Redband Net Pen project to simply calling it Rufus Woods Net Pens project (see edit notes at the end of proposal).

The table content is updated frequently and thus contains more recent information than what was in the original proposal reviewed by ISRP and Council.

Public Attachments in CBFish

ID Title Type Period Contract Uploaded
P110507 2008-117-00 ISRP FAN1 Other - 2/25/2009 7:48:21 AM
P112342 200811700 ISRP FAN1R Other - 7/2/2009 9:12:12 AM
P122337 Rufus Woods Redband Net Pens Progress (Annual) Report 02/2010 - 01/2011 51235 8/2/2011 4:02:06 PM
P128048 Rufus Woods Redband Net Pens Progress (Annual) Report 05/2011 - 04/2012 57082 9/6/2012 9:36:47 AM
P133552 Rufus Woods Net Pen Progress Report; 5/12 - 4/13 Progress (Annual) Report 05/2012 - 04/2013 61175 10/24/2013 2:20:25 PM
P141850 Rufus Woods Redband Net Pens; 5/13 - 4/14 Progress (Annual) Report 05/2013 - 04/2014 65059 3/11/2015 10:10:59 AM

Other Project Documents on the Web

None


The Project Relationships tracked automatically in CBFish provide a history of how work and budgets move between projects. The terms "Merged" and "Split" describe the transfer of some or all of the Work and budgets from one or more source projects to one or more target projects. For example, some of one project's budget may be split from it and merged into a different project. Project relationships change for a variety of reasons including the creation of efficiency gains.
Project Relationships: This project Merged To 1985-038-00 effective on 2/18/2015
Relationship Description: Starting with the FY15 contract cycle, all work/budget from 2008-117-00 Rufus Woods Redband Net Pens will be managed under 1985-038-00 Colville Hatchery O&M. These projects are being combined for contract, administrative and operating efficiency.


Additional Relationships Explanation:

The Rufus Woods Redband Net Pen Project works directly with the Colville Hatchery O & M (#1985-038-00) and Rufus Woods Creel and Supplementation (2007-405-00).    The Colville Hatchery O & M project rears, marks and transports all juvenile rainbow trout  to the net pen site.  Hatchery project staff also assists in direct releases from net pen site or transporting fish  to specific reservation lakes.  
The net pen project also coordinates with the Rufus Woods Creel and Supplementation Project.  Lake Rufus Woods is stocked by fish purchased from local aquaculture facilities, occasional hatchery releases, as well as direct releases from the Rufus Woods Redband Net Pen project.  
Angling pressure and angler success are measured by staff from the Rufus Woods Creel Project, but any environmental measurements, gill net or hydroacoustic surveys are performed by Hatchery Project Staff.


Primary Focal Species
Trout, Rainbow (Oncorhynchus mykiss)

Secondary Focal Species
None

Describe how you are taking into account potential biological and physical effects of factors such as non-native species, predation increases, climate change and toxics that may impact the project’s focal species and their habitat, potentially reducing the success of the project. For example: Does modeling exist that predicts regional climate change impacts to your particular geographic area? If so, please summarize the results of any predictive modeling for your area and describe how you take that into consideration.
Threats to program investments and project success: View instructions
Annual spring runoff has to be taken into consideration in planning project goals at net pen site.  The high total dissolved gas that occurred in 2011, produced an initial 30% mortality at the upper commercial net pen site (Clark, B., personal communication).  Once fish have been subjected to these extreme conditions, they are compromised and any environmental, biological or terrestrial stressors can elevate mortality levels (Delano, D., personal communication).
High water temperature profiles in the Columbia River system can also have a significant impact on success of project.   The Colville Tribal Hatchery has contracted a Fish Health Specialist through WDFW that is available to sample, test and provide early diagnosis and suggest logical treatments for production at the net pen site.  Avoidance strategies are implemented when water temperatures are elevated. Water temperatures are monitored prior to any handling or out-planting fish.  All entry fish should be transferred into pens at the beginning of May.  This allows us to take advantage of several months with optimum conditions for growth.

Work Classes
Program Name:  
Net Pen Program
Type:  
Segregated
Fish Species:  
Trout, Rainbow (Oncorhynchus mykiss)
Please describe which opportunities have been explored to restore or reintroduce resident native fish and their habitats?
In 2003, the Colville Tribe was committed to replace the coastal rainbow trout stock with a native redband stock. Redband were obtained from Bridge Creek (small stream on reservation) and from WDFW Phalon Lake stock (S. Boulder Creek cross) and used toward developing a redband broodstock at the Colville Tribal Hatchery. By 2009, all rainbow trout produced and outplanted came from the hatchery came from the redband broodstock program. Over several years, Hatchery Project Staff collected data from creel and lake surveys, gill net, hydro acoustics, etc. that have shown stocked redbands have high mortality, slow growth and tend to outmigrate whenever possible. Redbands also performed poorly at the hatchery. In comparison to the coastal Goldendale stock that use to be reared at the hatchery, redband rainbow trout were 30% more susceptible to Cold Water Disease and disease would consistently linger even after treatment. Rearing densities, daily feed % and other stressors were examined in attempts to discourage CWD occurrence with little success. In an effort to control cold water bacteria and disease, hatchery participated in INAD (Investigational New Animal Drug) study administering Chloramine-T. Redband Feed Conversion Rates (FCR) were also up to 30% higher. Adjusting feeding regimes and type of feed did not improve FCR. Redbands also required 35% more rearing space than Goldendale's. Since the redbands performance was poor at the hatchery and in the lake environments, their overall contribution to fishery was poor. These results forced managers to make the decision to transition away from using this redband stock and revert back to using a more domesticated, triploid rainbow stock.
Has a loss assessment been completed for your particular subbasin/or province?
No
Describe how the project addresses the loss assessment. If a loss assessment is in progress or being proposed, describe the status and scope of that work.
A Resident Fish Loss Assessment Project was identified in the CCT MOA Accords. A proposal will be submitted as part of this categorical review process. Because no methodologies have been developed to determine fish loss, the Loss Assessment proposal will address the development of these methodologies. Therefore this specific project does not address the loss assessment at this time.
If you are using non-native fish species to achieve mitigation, have you completed an environmental risk assessment of potential negative impacts to native resident fish?
No
Please describe: for the production of non-native fish, what are the potential impacts on native fish populations, including predation, competition, genetic impacts, and food web implications?
Triploid rainbow trout are planted in numerous lakes and streams as a put and take fishery and most stream dwelling triploids are captured immediately or migrate downstream into Lake Roosevelt where Spokane triploid stocks currently exist. Therefore competition, predation and other food web implications are minimal if any. Genetic impacts are minimal because they are triploided (98%).
Does your proposed work support or implement a production goal identified in a USFWS Bull Trout Recovery Plan?
No

Loading ...
Layers
Legend
Name (Identifier) Area Type Source for Limiting Factor Information
Type of Location Count
Chief Joseph Dam to Grand Coulee Dam Mainstem None

Project Deliverable definition: A significant output of a project that often spans multiple years and therefore may be accomplished by multiple contracts and multiple work elements. Contract Deliverables on the other hand are smaller in scope and correspond with an individual work element. Title and describe each Project Deliverable including an estimated budget, start year and end year. Title: A synopsis of the deliverable. For example: Crooked River Barrier and Channel Modification. Deliverable Description: Describe the work required to produce this deliverable in 5000 characters or less. A habitat restoration deliverable will contain a suite of actions to address particular Limiting Factors over time for a specified Geographic area typically not to exceed a species population’s range. Briefly include the methods for implementation, in particular any novel methods you propose to use, including an assessment of factors that may limit success. Do not go into great detail on RM&E Metrics, Indicators, and Methods if you are collecting or analyzing data – later in this proposal you’ll be asked for these details.
Project Deliverables: View instructions
Produce sterile rainbow trout for Reservation waters and boundary waters (DELV-1)
Contract and develop rearing plan with one of the local aquaculture facilties, Pacific Aquaculture/Pacific Seafoods or Chief Joseph Fish Farms, to rear rainbow trout according to the Colville Tribes Resident Fish Program needs and goals. Eyed eggs will be purchased from WDFW and triploided. All entry fish will reared and transported to net pens by the Colville Tribal Fish Hatchery staff. Hatchery Project staff will also assist in direct net pen releases or transporting fish from site into reservation lakes.
Ed Shallenberger and Jill Phillips will be responsible for deliverable.
Types of Work:
Work Class Work Elements
Hatchery
176. Produce Hatchery Fish
187. Put and Take Fisheries

Monitor and Administer Project (DELV-4)
Project is monitored for success. Project & budget management; planning & coordination with contractor, hatchery staffs, vendors and administration staffs. Administering project includes supplies and equipment purchases.
Jill Phillips and Ed Shallenberger are key personnel involved with this deliverable.
Types of Work:

Submit Progress Reports (DELV-7)
Progress Reports are submitted quarterly through PISCES. Specific timeline is determined by project COTR.
Jill Phillips is primarily responsible for this deliverable.
Types of Work:

Produce Annual Report (DELV-8)
An annual report will be submitted documenting the project's performance of the previous year. Net Pen production, mortality, and fish releases or out plants will be summarized in report. Report will be submitted to COTR for attachment into PISCES.
Jill Phillips and Ed Shallenberger are responsible for deliverable.
Types of Work:


Objective: Supplement fishery to provide harvest and recreational opportunities for tribal and non-tribal members. (OBJ-1)

Project Deliverables How the project deliverables help meet this objective*

Produce sterile rainbow trout for Reservation waters and boundary waters (DELV-1) Fish produced from project will provide harvest and recreational opportunities for tribal and non-tribal members. North and South Twin Lakes, fishing open to tribal and non-tribal members, were both planted at the beginning of May 2011 with fish produced from the net pens. Both lakes have had one of the most successful fisheries documented in recent years. Expanding program will allow larger spring entry fish to be out-planted into more reservation lakes and boundary waters.

Monitor and Administer Project (DELV-4) Project will be monitored and administered to successful provide more harvest and recreational opportunities throughout Reservation lakes, including boundary waters, for tribal and non- tribal members

Submit Progress Reports (DELV-7) Progress reports show progression or document shortfalls of project. Reports will be submitted in PISCES for COTR approval.

Produce Annual Report (DELV-8) The Annual Report will document details of the project's performance period, summarize major accomplishments and discuss future goals of project. This Annual Report will be submitted to COTR, attached in PISCES, then made available to the public.


Objective: Increase efficiency and decrease the cost to rear a pound of fish (OBJ-2)

Project Deliverables How the project deliverables help meet this objective*

Produce sterile rainbow trout for Reservation waters and boundary waters (DELV-1) Project expansion will allow the net pens to increase its effeciency and produce larger fish in a more cost effective way to be distributed into Rufus Woods and select Reservation lakes.


Objective: Relieve Pressure on the Colville Tribal Hatchery resources (OBJ-3)

Project Deliverables How the project deliverables help meet this objective*

Produce sterile rainbow trout for Reservation waters and boundary waters (DELV-1) Additional production reared at net pens will relieve pressure from the Colville Tribal Fish Hatchery's resources while addressing reservation waters stocking needs. The net pen project has the ability to rear larger spring entry fish in support of successful reservation lake fisheries and support Lake Rufus Woods as a destination fishery. Project allows the Tribal Hatchery to focus on rearing juvenile to catchable sized fish (operating facility as designed), while a 1 to 3 pound fish that require 3 times the water and rearing space can be cultured in net pens.


*This section was not available on proposals submitted prior to 9/1/2011

There are no RM&E protocols identified for this proposal.

Project Deliverable Start End Budget
Produce sterile rainbow trout for Reservation waters and boundary waters (DELV-1) 2013 2017 $714,800
Monitor and Administer Project (DELV-4) 2013 2017 $852,631
Submit Progress Reports (DELV-7) 2013 2017 $600
Produce Annual Report (DELV-8) 2013 2017 $15,500
Total $1,583,531
Requested Budget by Fiscal Year

Fiscal Year Proposal Budget Limit Actual Request Explanation of amount above FY2012
2013 $310,818 Expanding project to add additional production, net pens and cages. Additional cost to purchase equipment and supplies.
2014 $312,625
2015 $325,254 Replace/repair net pens.
2016 $316,482
2017 $318,352
Total $0 $1,583,531
Item Notes FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017
Personnel $29,424 $30,093 $30,780 $31,482 $32,203
Travel $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Prof. Meetings & Training $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Vehicles $850 $850 $850 $850 $850
Facilities/Equipment (See explanation below) $140,871 $141,852 $153,633 $143,815 $144,796
Rent/Utilities $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Capital Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Overhead/Indirect $6,263 $6,420 $6,581 $6,745 $6,913
Other Sub-Contracts $133,410 $133,410 $133,410 $133,590 $133,590
PIT Tags $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Total $310,818 $312,625 $325,254 $316,482 $318,352
Major Facilities and Equipment explanation:
Beginning in FY2013, Additional pens, cages and supplies will be purchased to expand project. A new fish counter will be researched and purchased to provide hands free fish counts on direct releases and out-plants. A fish counter will reduce fish stress and will be more efficient with labor and time. The major costs under Facilities/Equipment for this project throughout identified fiscal years are purchasing and supplying fish feed. Fish feed constitutes up to 97% of the budget for this line item. The Colville Tribal Fish Hatchery staff will rear and transport marked/tagged entry fish into net pens. Hatchery staff will assist in out-planting a portion of the net pen population into reservation waters through the use of oxygen rich, water filled tanks on liberation trucks. The Colville Tribal Hatchery facility provides office space and internet access for administering project and submitting reports. The Colville Fish & Wildlife Administration staff assists with sub-contracts, financials, accruals, payroll and purchases.

Arterburn, J. 2002. Colville Tribal Hatchery Annual Report for 2003. Colville Confederated Tribes Fish and Wildlife Department, Nespelem, WA. Colville Confederated Tribes Fish and Wildlife Department. 2007. Fish and Wildlife Resource Management Plan and Five Year Implementation Schedule, 2007-2011. Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation, Nespelem, WA. Northwest Power and Conservation Council. "Sections 45, 46, 47: Overview, Aquatic Assessment & Inventory, Lake Rufus Woods. Intermountain Province(IMP)Subbasin Plan." Spokane, WA. 2004. Phillips, J. 2011. Rufus Woods Redband Net Pen Project Annual Progress Report 2011. Confederated Tribes Fish and Wildlife Department, Nespelem, WA. Shallenberger, E. W. 2009. Colville Tribal Hatchery Annual Report for 2008. Colville Confederated Tribes Fish and Wildlife Department, Nespelem, WA. Shallenberger, E. W. 2010. Colville Tribal Hatchery Annual Report for 2009. Colville Confederated Tribes Fish and Wildlife Department, Nespelem, WA. Shallenberger, E. W. 2011. Twin Lakes Enhancement Annual Report for 2010. Colville Confederated Tribes Fish and Wildlife Department, Nespelem, WA. Small, M. P., McLellan, J.,Loxterman, J., Von Bargen, J., Frye, A.,and Bowman, C. 2005. Population structure of rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in the Spokane River drainage. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Conservation Biology Unit, Genetics Lab and Spokane Office. In CROHMS Water Quality Reports. Retrieved Grand Coulee TDG May 10, 2011 thru July 20, 2011, from www.nwd-wc.usace.army.mil/report/total.html

Changing project name was already referred to in the summarize history section, adaptive management. It is suggested and agreed to change the project name from Rufus Woods Redband Net Pen project to simply Rufus Woods Net Pens project. This has been discussed previously with the COTR with agreement, it makes sense. The project does not necessarily need to refer to what type of stock it is using as an identifier. Currently, the project is transitioning away from using a redband stock to utilizing a domestic Spokane triploided stock.

Review: Resident Fish, Regional Coordination, and Data Management Category Review

Independent Scientific Review Panel Assessment

Assessment Number: 2008-117-00-ISRP-20120215
Project: 2008-117-00 - Rufus Woods Redband Net Pens
Review: Resident Fish, Regional Coordination, and Data Management Category Review
Proposal Number: RESCAT-2008-117-00
Completed Date: 4/17/2012
Final Round ISRP Date: 4/3/2012
Final Round ISRP Rating: Does Not Meet Scientific Review Criteria
Final Round ISRP Comment:

The recommendation is for Colville Hatchery Operation and Maintenance (198503800) and Rufus Woods Redband Net Pens (200811700). The comments apply to both proposals, although specific comments on the progression of the Net Pens project are provided below.

The ISRP appreciates the effort the Colville Tribal Fisheries staff put into the response to the ISRP’s preliminary review of the Colville Tribal Hatchery and the Rufus Woods net pen proposals. The sponsors provided an informal description of the resident trout and net pen programs while attempting to address the ISRP questions. A number of questions from the ISRP’s preliminary review were addressed, and the panel is better able to understand the scope and details of the project. While the information was interesting, the presentation does not allow one to evaluate the recent performance of the program in terms of harvests by tribal members in relation to numbers of eggs brought into culture and fish stocked in reservation waters. 

The sponsor needs to develop a trout stocking master plan which guides the annual stocking, provides a basis for Fish and Wildlife Program proposal review, and provides for evaluation of the success of the program. The plan should generally include information requested in Three Step Master Plans for anadromous hatcheries. The plan should critique the resident fish hatchery program for its ability to provide catchable trout on the reservation while demonstrating efficient and productive practices. The plan should develop hatchery and harvest goals and collect information to evaluate whether these goals are being met. Some documentation of fishing effort is needed on each lake that is stocked; otherwise it is impossible to determine whether the effort is worthwhile. This plan should incorporate the Rufus Woods net pen project and fish purchased and released under the Rufus Woods Habitat/Passage Improvement, Creel, and Triploid Supplementation (200740500).

The ISRP finds that the project does not meet specific review criteria established by the 1996 amendment to the Power Act for NW Power and Conservation Council Fish and Wildlife Program. Those criteria state that projects: 1) are based on sound science principles; 2) benefit fish and wildlife; 3) have clearly defined objectives and outcomes; and 4) have provisions for monitoring and evaluation of results. In particular, documentation addressing ISRP review criteria 1, 3, and 4 are not evident in the proposal, annual reports, or response.

Projects are based on sound science principals. The ISRP is unable to conclude the stocking regime for each body of water has a defensible scientific rationale. Table 7 of the response to the ISRP lists each body of water and identifies the number of fish stocked of each species in 2011, and identifies potential problems in the lakes and streams. A plan is needed that identifies the different species, their size, and their numbers, that could potentially be stocked in each lake or stream and a justification for those species, numbers, and sizes based on empirical stock recruitment information from the lake or stream. The narrative provided in the proposal suggests that some biological information is used to establish a stocking program, but the decision framework is never presented. Stocking brook trout in North and South Twin Lake is an example of the stocking that is inadequately justified. The proposal states that self-sustaining populations of brook trout occupy these lakes. No stock recruitment or harvest data are provided to indicate that hatchery fish are necessary to provide a fishery. What factors led to the stocking of about one million trout into the relatively small Twin Lakes in 2009? What is the justification for the proposed increased of stocked large triploid trout in Rufus Woods Reservoir from 20,000 to 60,000 fish, and what information is available that these additional fish have minimal effects on native fishes. Stocking catchable rainbow trout in streams based on pre-stocking electrofishing surveys of abundance is another example. The justification for why a specific abundance level triggers additional stocking is not provided. Documentation of the stocking decision framework is important for informing future managers in addition to informing this review by the ISRP. Additionally, fish rearing protocols at the net pens should be documented.

The basis for raising specific number of fish and stocking them into the reservation water bodies needs justification beyond the obvious need to provide resident fish harvests for tribal members. The program should demonstrate that its operations are effective and efficient in achieving the ultimate goal of providing harvests. 

Projects have clearly defined objectives and outcomes. The ISRP expects there will be established standards for hatchery and net pen production (egg take, eyed egg success, hatching success, and numbers released) for each species, and that the program will explicitly self-evaluate to those established benchmarks. The ISRP expects there will be standards established for fishery yields (CPUE, total harvest in relation to fish stocked, economic and other social benefits) for each body of water and the project as a whole. These standards should be consistent with types of data that can be collected. For example, if CPUE is measured in terms of fish per angler per day, then the standard should also be set using fish per angler per day. Although some fishery goals and evaluation were provided for the net pen project, others were incomplete. 

Projects have provisions for monitoring and evaluation. The ISRP concludes a sufficient monitoring program is not in place. A defined and statistically justified M&E plan is required for the resident fish stocking program that addresses both the biological/chemical/food-web and harvest factors. The ISRP understands and appreciates the difficulty in conducting direct creel surveys in small, remote lakes and streams. Nonetheless, the ISRP believes that effort needs to be made to better document the use of these lakes and the harvest of fish for the intended purpose of recreational angling or subsistence fishing. The documentation may need to use interview and survey techniques from the social science realm rather than the fisheries field.

The ISRP expresses concern about the fish culture performance at the hatchery. Hatchery performance data were provided by the sponsor that raised questions, yet there was no evaluation of these production numbers by the sponsors. Table 4 in the response to the ISRP summarizes egg take, eyed eggs, fish ponded, and fish released for brook trout, Lahontan cutthroat trout, rainbow trout, and redband rainbow trout. For brook trout and Lahontan cutthroat trout, the average percent eye-up for the past seven years has been 67% and 54% respectively, and survival to release has been only 36% and 30% respectively.For rainbow trout from Washington Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, the survival from green egg to release averaged only 25% for brood years 2006 and 2007. This level of success in the fish-rearing phase of the program is in need of investigation and improvement. Also, why does the number of green eggs vary so much within a species from year to year? The ISRP acknowledges the information provided on water supply challenges. The hatchery production program should be designed around water supply constraints.

The ISRP previously concluded in 2009 that the Rufus Woods Redband Net Pen Project met scientific review criteria with the qualifications that the project be designed as a proof-of-concept test for native redband brood fish management, and that future proposals identify goals and monitoring results that are integrated with the overall Colville resident fish hatchery program. The current proposal indicated that net pen culture of redband trout did not meet the Tribe’s needs (see statement below).Although the net pen proposal identified some goals, for example harvest 30% of stocked fish, and provided some observations this information was incomplete, as noted above. 

The current proposal reflects major changes in the Rufus Woods Redband Net Pens (200811700) project direction. The original proposal was for rearing redband trout broodstock, and actual stocking of production fish was a minor element with numbers and locations of fish to be stocked unidentified. The sponsor has suggested that redband trout are not suitable for stocking in reservation lakes and perform poorly in the tribal hatchery, although conflicting statements were also provided in the proposal: “The project successfully reared and released over 16,960 kg of redband rainbow trout into Rufus Woods and reservation lakes. This amount constitutes 76% of the Colville Tribal Resident Fish Hatchery’s annual production goal (Shallenberger, E., 2010). Associated project costs calculated out to be less than a quarter of what it would cost to raise these fish at the hatchery. The project has provided a cost effective way to grow much larger fish, alleviate some pressure on the hatchery’s current resources and provided a wonderful spring fishery on North and South Twin Lakes and Lake Rufus Woods.” Nevertheless, the sponsor has transitioned this project from rearing redband broodstock to rearing triploid rainbow trout for direct stocking into Lake Rufus Woods, North and South Twin Lakes, and unspecified reservation streams. Justification for this production is needed in a Master Plan. The ISRP is unable to determine why triploid rainbow trout from the net pens are needed for Lake Rufus Woods since project 200740500 is purchasing triploid fish from net pen operators for stocking.

ISRP Retrospective Evaluation of Results

The original goal of the Rufus Woods Net Pens project (200811700) was to raise native redband trout broodstock and reduce capacity issues at the Colville Tribal Hatchery. After implementing the project, the sponsor stated that “the project successfully reared and released over 16,960 kg of redband rainbow trout into Rufus Woods and reservation lakes. This amount constitutes 76% of the Colville Tribal Resident Fish Hatchery’s annual production goal (Shallenberger, E., 2010). Associated project costs calculated out to be less than a quarter of what it would cost to raise these fish at the hatchery. The project has provided a cost effective way to grow much larger fish, alleviate some pressure on the hatchery’s current resources and provided a wonderful spring fishery on North and South Twin Lakes and Lake Rufus Woods.” Nevertheless, in the most recent proposal, the sponsor concluded that the performance of redband trout in the hatchery and Rufus Woods net pens was insufficient to meet program needs. Stocking native redband trout was deleted as a key objective in the 2011 proposal.

The project has transitioned to rearing and releasing triploid rainbow trout. The goal in 2011 was to release 20,000 large triploid trout into the Twin Lakes and 20,000 trout into Rufus Woods for tribal and sport harvests. A reported 10,000 trout were stocked into South Twin Lake, but no values were presented for North Twin Lake or Rufus Woods. In 2011, approximately 1,769 rainbow trout were harvested in Rufus Woods and 15,477 trout were captured in the Twin Lakes. This project needs to be incorporated into a resident fish hatchery Master Plan, improve upon its stocking plan, and carefully evaluate whether the project is achieving specific goals such as catch per hour or percentage of stocked fish harvested.

 

First Round ISRP Date: 2/8/2012
First Round ISRP Rating: Response Requested
First Round ISRP Comment:

The proposal needs major revision including:

  1. an expanded explanation of significance to regional programs/plans
  2. a revised technical background giving a more complete history of lost fisheries and the need for resident fish substitution
  3. objectives that are specific and measurable
  4. deliverables and work elements that specifically describe the tasks needed to meet objectives
  5. detailed methods for raising the net pen fish or a sub-contractors specifications and methods
  6. a description of the evaluation and decision framework used to establish stocking location and numbers, and how this stocking is integrated in the Colville Tribal Hatchery rearing and stocking plans.

See the ISRP’s programmatic comments on fish stocking.

The Council’s 1999 Artificial Production Review (NWPCC 1999-15) established that evaluating hatcheries based on numbers or pounds of fish produced and released was inadequate and that goals and objectives were required for post-release performance. The ISRP looks for clear metrics for performance in the hatchery or net pen including in-pen survival and growth, disease monitoring or other health inspections, percentage of triploid trout, net pen water quality compliance inspections, and food conversion as well as post-release performance including survival for stated intervals, harvest, and fish condition. These should be identified and reported for the time period since the last ISRP review. The Rufus Woods net pen project provided data for in-pen survival and growth, but there was no information on survival and harvests of these fish in Twin Lakes and Rufus Woods. The proposal should also identify impacts of the stocked fish on resident fishes in each of the receiving waters, including elevated harvest rates on native trout in response to higher fishing effort for example in Rufus Woods. The ISRP understands that post release data may come from other projects, but the information should be summarized in the net pen proposal.

1. Purpose: Significance to Regional Programs, Technical Background, and Objectives

Significance to Regional Programs: Insufficient information was provided. The proposal identifies that the CCT Fish Management Plan includes elements that the project fulfills, but those elements should be described. The linkages to elements in subbasin plans beyond the San Poil are likely since fish are intended for release in Lake Rufus Woods. The proposal should identify how it is linked to other relevant regional planning efforts such as the Lake Roosevelt Guiding Document, the Lake Roosevelt Fisheries Evaluation Project, and the Council’s Fish and Wildlife Program. Additionally, the numbers of fish to be purchased and released into Lake Rufus Woods by this project should be described. Interactions with the Lake Rufus Woods Creel and Supplementation (2007-405-00) project and the Resident Fish above Chief Joseph and Grand Coulee Dams (1997-004-00) need to be stated. 

Technical Background: Insufficient information is provided. The sponsor states the program provides subsistence and recreational trout fishing opportunities to substitute for lost anadromous fishing. This overarching purpose is fine. The technical background does not provide sufficient information on the specific lakes on the Colville Reservation that might be stocked using fish from this project. A decision framework, for example a regional resident fish stocking plan, that identifies the policy and scientific guidance from tribal management plans to direct the annual stocking is needed. This framework should be described in a comprehensive residence fish stocking plan that encompasses all hatchery activities in the upper Columbia region. A brief description with references of lost anadromous fisheries is needed to demonstrate the need for the resident fish substitution.

Objectives: Incomplete information is provided. There are three objectives identified: supplement fishery to provide harvest; increase efficiency and decrease the cost; relieve pressure on Colville Tribal Hatchery. These objectives need quantitative standards identified as goals that can be evaluated by metrics. There are no quantitative objectives for fish rearing success or for subsequent harvest. There should be quantitative objectives for fish harvesting metrics such as catch per effort, total harvest, angler days, and angler satisfaction as well as quantitative objectives for fish growth and survival. None are provided in the proposal. Monitoring is needed to evaluate whether the objectives are achieved.

2. History: Accomplishments, Results, and Adaptive Management (ISRP Review of Results)

Accomplishments: The project has one year of fish rearing experience from net pens stocked with 22g redband trout in June 2010 and released fish in the spring of 2011, under emergency circumstances because of gas super-saturation. Accurate estimates of survival are needed and observed survival should be compared with a goal in order to evaluate effectiveness of net pen rearing. The proposal did not describe whether or not juvenile fish, presumably rainbow trout, were stocked into net pens during the spring/summer of 2011 for release in 2012. No information is provided on harvest from the fish stocked.

Adaptive management: The evaluation of redband trout culture and switch from redband trout to triploid rainbow trout was provided as a management response.

ISRP Retrospective Evaluation of Results

The first year of operation (2010) determined that the performance of redband trout in the hatchery and Rufus Woods net pens was insufficient to meet program needs. The project plans to transition to rainbow trout, but no information on rainbow trout net pen operations was provided for 2011.

3. Project Relationships, Emerging Limiting Factors, and Tailored Questions for Type of Work (hatchery, RME, tagging)

Project Relationships: The proposal notes that the Rufus Woods Net Pen Project works directly with the Colville Hatchery O&M (#1985-038-00) and Rufus Woods Creel and Supplementation (#2007-405-00). However, the project also interacts with the Twin Lakes oxygenation project and Resident Fish above Chief Joseph and Grand Coulee Dams (#1997-004-00). The full scope of the interactions is not clear and needs to be better established. The relationship of this project to Tribal management outside of the BPA scope is not discussed. BPA funded trout rearing and stocking projects implemented by other sponsors are not identified. Standards for fish release, yield in fisheries, disease management, etc. established by the State of Washington, that may apply to this project are not discussed.

Emerging limiting factors: The proposal focuses primarily on limnological conditions, dissolved gas in Lake Rufus Woods and fish health concerns during net-pen rearing. Both of these limits need to be discussed in more detail in the problem statement and/or accomplishments section. The brief discussion of the health issues, in addition to dissolved gas, needs additional details.

Tailored Questions: Adequately answered and discussed.

4. Deliverables, Work Elements, Metrics, and Methods

The general description of the primary deliverable consisting of purchasing triploid trout eggs from WDFW, hatching eggs and rearing fish to 22g, and then contracting for rearing to catchable size for a put-and-take fishery is clear. There needs to be quantifiable elements attached to the deliverables. For example, the explanation of how the deliverables meet the objectives needs additional detail. How will objectives 2 and 3 be evaluated, and what is the threshold for success?

4a. Specific comments on protocols and methods described in MonitoringMethods.org

Apparently, no protocols or methods were submitted to MonitoringMethods.org.

Modified by Dal Marsters on 4/17/2012 1:13:29 PM.
Documentation Links:
  • Proponent Response (3/6/2012)
Proponent Response:

1. Purpose: Significance to Regional Programs, Technical Background, and Objectives

The Integrated Resource Management Plan ( IRMP) identified the Tribal memberships vision for the present and future management of their resources.   Colville Fish & Wildlife Resource Management Plan and Five Year Implementation Schedule contains broad visionary goals, objectives and strategies with specific metrics.  The Colville Fish and Wildlife Resource Management Plan provides specific goals for resident fish substitution under the Resident Fish Program.  The Net Pen Project assists in meeting goal RFG 4.0 in providing opportunities for consumptive and non-consumptive resident fisheries for native, introduced, wild, and hatchery reared stocks that are compatible with native resident fish management.  Sub goal RFG4.01 is to promote the Tribe’s cultural and subsistence fisheries using natural reproduction and hatchery supplementation. 

The Tribal Hatchery within this Management Plan has its own specific goal to provide significant fishery benefits while having minimal adverse impacts on long term productivity of naturally spawning fish and their ecosystems.  The CCT hatchery utilizes a sterile triploid stock in semi-terminal/terminal lakes and a few tributaries that are intended to have minimal impact on native redband stocks.  A basin wide survey assessing triploid and redband interactions is being proposed during this review cycle and should provide further guidance on triploid stocking in the future.

The Lake Rufus Woods Sub-Basin Plan, a section of the Intermountain Province (IMP) Sub-basin Plan , identified the loss of anadromous resources and converting the river system into reservoirs from the construction of Chief Joseph and Grand Coulee dams as one of the most important limiting factor for Lake Rufus Woods fisheries. The Net Pen project assists Province Level objective 1A goal to mitigate for fish losses from construction & operation of hydropower projects by providing resident fish substitution.  The project is transitioning from a mixed redband rainbow trout stock to a domestic triploid rainbow trout stock in efforts to minimize negative impacts (introgression) on native species.  This action addresses objective 1C3 & 2A3 in the sub-basin plan.   (“Lake Rufus Woods Subbasin Plan.”  In Intermountain Province Sub-basin Plan. Spokane, Wa., 2004.) 

Colville Tribes Resident Fish Program also follows the Artificial Production Review Guidelines developed by the Northwest Power Planning Council to annually evaluate the purpose of hatchery and net pen production within the sub-basin and identify any hatchery reforms that need to be instituted and budgeted.  This is also a goal within the CCT Fish and Wildlife Resource Management Plan (RFHG1.O2).

Linkages to the Lake Roosevelt Guiding Document and the Lake Roosevelt Fisheries Evaluation Project are not consistent with this net pen project.  The Net Pen Project is a substitution program for Lake Rufus Woods and inland waters of the Colville Reservation.  No fish from this project are released directly into Lake Roosevelt or any lake within the Sanpoil river or its tributaries in order to prevent any genetic dilution of the redband stocks that other Tribal projects are attempting to rehabilitate. 

This project is an extension of the Colville Hatchery Project (#1985-038-00).  In providing resident fish substitution as mitigation for fish losses, the project currently distributes fish at approximately a 50/50 ratio, half toward Lake Rufus Woods and half toward appropriate Reservation lakes.    Rainbow trout originate from the Colville Tribal Fish Hatchery where they are incubated, reared and marked before entry into the net pen.  Fish are NOT purchased and released into Lake Rufus Woods or Reservation waters from this project; instead fish are transferred from the tribal hatchery to the net pen.  Once they arrive at the net pen, project essentially begins. Fish are reared according to established rearing guidelines and project goals, then distributed to Reservation lakes and Lake Rufus Woods in the Spring. 

Technical Background:

The project provides rainbow trout to Lake Rufus Woods and Reservation waters as large one pound spring entry fish.   Since the inception of the project, the project has stocked Rufus Woods with 20,000 redband rainbow trout, North Twin Lake with 10,000 redband rainbow trout and South Twin with 10,000 redband rainbow trout (Table 1).  The tribes objective in the future is to increase net pen production as stated in the proposal to 100,000 triploid rainbow trout with the bulk of these fish stocked in Rufus Woods.  However,  other Reservation waters maybe be stocked with net pen fish that include:  Buffalo, Bourgeau, Little Goose, Round, La Fleur, Summit, Nicholas and Elbow. 

Annually, the Colville Tribes Fish & Wildlife's Resident Fish Stocking Plan is evaluated and adjusted to meet Reservation water needs.  Stocking decisions are based on results from creel surveys, gill net surveys and whole lake surveys that are performed by M&E staff from three separate projects, Lake Rufus Woods Creel and Supplementation (2007-405-00), Colville Hatchery O & M Project (#1985-038-00) and Twin Lakes Enhancement (#2008-111-00) 

The annual Resident Fish Stocking Plan, implemented by the Colville Tribal Fish Hatchery and the Rufus Woods Net Pen project,  is determined by a number of factors. 

  1. Management Objectives
  2. Desires of the Tribal membership
  3. Water quality
  4. Biological risks (hybridization potential, disease, competition, survival, water quality limitations).
  5. Monitoring and evaluation information (Angler pressure and success, relative weights, etc).

In waters where information is lacking,  indicators of fish health and historical information are used.  Historical information such as previously observed growth rates, relative weights, limited angling pressure data and historical stocking numbers are used to develop stocking numbers ateach specific location.

 

Table 1.  Resident fish hatchery stocking plan for inland waters of the Colville Reservation and Rufus Woods documenting net pen numbers, size and release location.

 Annual Stocking Plan 2011

 

Brief description with references of lost anadromous fisheries.

The Colville Tribes Resident Fish Program plays an important role in providing subsistence fisheries for the Tribal Membership.  Historically anadromous fish (salmon and steelhead) were the principal subsistence fishery, with resident fish playing a minor role.  However, the construction of  Grand Coulee and Chief Joseph Dams resulted in the extirpation of anadromous fish and consequently the loss of an anadromous subsistence fishery. As a result, resident fish became a significant and necessary alternative as a subsistence resource because of the extirpation of anadromous fish above Chief Joseph and Grand Coulee dams.  ("Lake Rufus Woods Subbasin Plan.”  In Intermountain Province Sub-basin Plan. Spokane, Wa., 2004., Colville Fish and Wildlife Management Resource Plan and 5-year Implementation Schedule, Hrusha, C., CCT Fish and Wildlife Staff, Nespelem, Wa., 2005.). The Northwest Power and Conservation Council (NPCC) recognizes the need for resident fish substitution programs to mitigate for losses of salmon and steelhead production above Chief Joseph and Grand Coulee Dams. 

2. History: Accomplishments, Results, and Adaptive Management 

 One of the goals of  The Colville Fish & Wildlife Resource Management Plan and Five Year Implementation Plan is to provide opportunities for consumptive and non-consumptive resident fisheries with use of hatchery supplementation and maximize return to the creel of hatchery origin fish where appropriate and consistent with native species conservation.   Specific metric associated with the plan include targeted sizes and angler CPUE where creel surveys are conducted; rainbow trout will average 342.9-mm (13.5 inches) fork length and a CPUE (catch per unit effort) 0.5 - 1 fish/hr., as catchable sizes. 

 South Twin Lake was stocked with 10,000 fish in 2011 from the net pen project and met specific metrics outlined in the CCT F&W Management Plan.   For example, the angler CPUE for South Twin Lakes in 2010 was 0.21/hr (below target goals) and increased to  0.88/hr (within target) in 2011 (Table 2), the highest rate in recent years. 

 Table 2. South Twin Lake Catch Rate and Average Size (g) 

S. Twin Annual Catch

  

Net Pen survival goal from entry to distribution  is  ≥ 75% to be considered successful.  High, sustained water temperatures in Rufus Woods caused the majority of mortality in the net pen fish.  In 2011, survival rate from the 2010 entry fish to distribution was 78.2%.  The current survival rate for the 2011 entry fish is 84.2%.

 The 2011 elevated gas levels in Rufus Woods caused a delay in the delivery of the net pen component from the hatchery to the contracted site.   Upon submitting Request for Proposals to both local aquaculture operations on Lake Rufus Woods, Pacific Aquaculture (PA) & Chief Joseph Fish Farms (CJFF), PA informed sponsor they were not interested in performing the sub-contract for fish rearing.  PA explained they had sustained heavy mortalities from the elevated gas levels and needed to focus on production and evaluating losses.   CJFF agreed they would rear fish for project.    Contractor was directed to follow the Columbia River Fish Farm (CRFF) feeding chart.  Chart is 20% less aggressive, feeding body weight percentages, than the Wild West Feed Chart that is used at commercial net pen operations.   Following the CRFF guidelines is particularly important during colder water temperatures.  Fish require less feed to maintain biological demands, feeding 20% more toward achieving growth during temperatures below 6° C may result in wasted feed and lower the FCR.  Sub-contract for fish rearing was administered and rearing plan and goals were discussed with CJFF Manager and agreed upon.

After contractors and sponsors responsibilities were outlined,  net pens were floated downstream from PA to CJFF site and 50,090 (4,749lbs.) redband rainbow trout @ 43 grams were delivered on August 8, 2011.    Sponsor completes monthly monitoring of project; sub sampling population, observing fish behavior, monthly meetings with contractor to discuss fish growth or to identify emerging issues, track mortalities and calculate FCR.  Monthly monitoring of the project is essential to ensure contractor's records are correct and project goals are achieved.  All project results are summarized annually in the project's progress report and attached in Pisces.  Quarterly status reports are also completed to update projects progress and detail any completed deliverables within Pisces.  Transitioning from redband stock to a triploided rainbow trout stock will occur in 2012, entry fish (juveniles) used for project will be Spokane stock purchased from WDFW.

Harvest estimates are unknown at this time because the first year of utilizing and assessing net pen fish was completed in December.  In the months preceding December project personnel were developing the current proposal for submission and did not have the time to analyze the data. 

3. Project Relationships, Emerging Limiting Factors, and Tailored Questions for Type of Work (hatchery, RME, tagging

Although project does not specifically perform M&E to determine its overall success of supplementing targeted fisheries, Lake Rufus Woods Creel and Supplementation (2007-405-00), Colville Hatchery O & M Project (#1985-038-00) and Twin Lakes Enhancement (#2008-111-00) projects all assist in M & E.  

 

Table 3. Project Relationships

 

 

 

 

 NP Project Relationships 

 

 

Emerging limiting factors:

The elevated gas levels caused from spring runoff and management of the hydropower facilities at Grand Coulee Dam during 2011 caused high fish mortalities for local aquaculture facilities.  The Manager for Pacific Aquaculture estimates the event initially caused a 20% loss of production from mortality and escapement.  The issue of TDG was forecasted and identified early in the year by CCT biologists who made the decision to remove/distribute production from project before levels rose.  In the future, the Net Pen Project can project increases in TDG,  make immediate decisions and take actions to eliminate mortality.  The tribal hatchery must also be flexible to the TDG issues since they rear juveniles for project. 

High water temperatures in Lake Rufus Woods during summer months are also identified as a limiting factor.  High water temperatures, above 65°F, cause rainbow trout in a net pen environment stress.  Rainbow trout in Lake Rufus Woods subjected to high water temperatures or high dissolved gas levels have the option to descend to more favorable or optimum levels at increased water depths.  Unfortunately the net pen environment does not allow fish to take advantage of this option.  Instead, net pen fish can become stressed and are more susceptible to disease which can cause high mortality. Prior to high water temperatures, net pen biomass of 10,000kg of fish are split into two-separate pens to lower rearing densities.  During elevated water temperatures in Rufus Woods the % body weight fed is consistent with chart requirements, however feed days are reduced in efforts to help fish cope with increased temperatures.  As water temperatures rise, available dissolved oxygen lowers adding to fish stress level.  Increased stress exposes them to and makes them susceptible to bacteria and parasites resulting in increased mortalitiy.  Fish growth during elevated water temperatures is not a consideration; instead focus is on avoiding any stressors that would cause disease or mortality.  

CCT contracts with WDFW Fish Health Specialist Bob Rogers.  In 2010 and 2011 he identified the Columnaris bacteria on moribund samples from the net pen site and suggested treatment with medicated feed for 10 days.  Mortalities from disease began dropping dramatically after completion of treatment, but lingered around 75 fish a day for approximately two more weeks until water temperatures began dropping.

  • Original response did not mention these other somewhat obvious limiting factors; pen rearing capacity and budget.  Each of the project nets are designed to culture up to 13,000 kg of production.  Before entering the high summer water temperatures the project does not push this production limit instead fish are split into another net pen or a partial release is conducted to stay under the biomass threshold of 10,000 kg.  Budget limitations effect project expansion capabilities, capital costs, and staffing.

 

There are no WDFW formal guidelines we are aware of, particularly with resident fish programs.  Fish size and releases are based on WDFW’s Regional Biologist’s recommendations and are directed toward each individual water body.  WDFW Fish Health guidelines have been established to ensure the health and productivity of cultured fish.  The Colville Tribal Fish Hatchery follows these established fish health guidelines in maintaining healthy fish and preventing fish diseases. Bob Rogers (Fish Health Specialist) from WDFW is annually contracted through the Colville Hatchery O&M (#1985-038-00) project to assist in preventative, early diagnosis and suggested treatment of fish disease at the tribal hatchery.  Prior to transporting entry fish from tribal hatchery to net pen site, a sample of fish are sacrificed for dissection and analysis to ensure fish are healthy for transfer.  Fish Health Guidelines assist to avoid transferring diseased fish into waters where contamination may occur and begin an outbreak.  If the Fish Health Specialist determines fish are sick or diseased, they will not be transferred until they receive a clean bill of health.

 

4. Deliverables, Work Elements, Metrics, and Methods

 Work Elements and deliverables are stated in Pisces.  Objectives with metrics are identified in more detail below.  Harvest, catch rates, angler satisfaction and associated methods are detailed in the related M & E component of each project, (see project relationships) results summarized in below tables. 

Objectives:

  1.   Increase efficiency results in decreased cost per pound of fish released:

 This project is more cost effective at raising larger fish for Reservation waters than the hatchery.  The hatchery is limited by water and rearing space where as this is not a limitation for the net pens.   The plan to increase project's efficiencies is twofold.  1.)The transition from using the redband rainbow mixed stock to a domestic rainbow (triploided) stock will decrease the feed conversion ratio (FCR) by a minimum of 20%, which lowers feed costs.  2.) Expanding program numbers and/or pounds will decrease the overall costs per pound of fish raised.  Ultimately, cost per pound should be lower than cost to purchase from the local commercial aquaculture operations ($2.25/lb., 2011).  In order to be as cost effective as the commercial facilities, project needs to expand and rear a minimum of 175,000lbs. (not including initial capital costs).

  1. Increase feed efficiency by lowering feed conversion rate.  Target an FCR of ≤ 1.2:1 to obtain a 1-1.5 pound fish.
  2. Expand project; as expansion occurs cost per pound lowers.  Target cost per pound of trout ≤ $2.25 (commercial aquaculture/market rate in 2011) reared.

2.  Relieve pressure from the Colville Tribal Fish Hatchery

 As mentioned above the hatchery has limited water and rearing space available.  Annually, the hatchery production quota is 50,000 pounds of fish.  The hatchery was not designed to produce large numbers of catchable or jumbo trout, it is however effective at rearing fish for a put, grow and take fishery (fall plants) and stream plants.  The hatchery cannot effectively rear enough large, high quality rainbow trout for Reservation waters and Lake Rufus Woods.  The Net Pen project has been able to relieve pressure from the hatchery by taking a portion of rainbow trout production and rearing it to a large catchable size for Rufus Woods and Reservation waters.  The project also focuses more on supplementing the Rufus Woods fishery.  By stocking larger fish that have been acclimating in the reservoir, they may have better survival and enter targeted fisheries (short & long term).    

 a. Target net pen population minimum of  50,000 fish.  Of this component  ≥ 20,000lbs.of  fish are identified as spring entries to be distributed into appropriate reservation lakes.

 

 3.  Supplement fishery to provide harvest:

Total fish planted will be specifc to each water body, size and amount distributed will be outlined in the Annual Resident Fish Stocking Plan.

Monitor and Evaluation will be performed by projects previously identified (project relationships). 

  1. Harvested numbers should be ≥ 30% in Reservation lakes that are creeled.
  2. CPUE  between 0.5 - 1 fish/hr., according to objectives identified in the Colville Fish & Wildlife Resource Management Plan 
  3. Angler satisfaction

 Anglers from both North and South Twin Lakes in 2011 were  satisified with total catch and the average fish size was > 600 grams.  Tables 4 below summarizes M & E results for the Twin Lakes.

 

Table 4. North & South Twin Lakes Angling Hours versus Catch

Twin Lakes Angln vs catch

Table 5. North & South Twin Lakes 2011 Catch, Harvest, Return to Creel

 

Lake Rufus Woods data suggests net pen fish may stay in lake longer than purchased, floy tagged fish.  Fish purchased, floy tagged and released into Rufus Woods through RufusWoods Creel & Supplementation project, dissappeared in a couple of days through harvest or other means (CCT unpublished data).  However,  the 2011 net pen project fish released are continuing to show up in Rufus Woods creel.  Creel results for 2011 released fish are shown below (Table 6) (CCT unpublished data). 

Table 6. 2011 Lake Rufus Woods creel identifying Ad/CWT fish (RW Net Pen)

RW Creel NP

Between May and June of 2011, local aquaculture facilities on Lake Rufus Woods had an estimated escapement >115,000 fish that averaged 2.5 to 3 Kg each.  Fish escapes in previous years from one of the aquaculture facilities has driven the fishery and many anglers throughout the United States have claimed Lake Rufus Woods as one of the best destination trophy trout lakes.  We hypothesize anglers targeted these larger fish that escaped in 2011.  In a normal year with limited escapement from the local aquaculture facilities, the net pen fish return to creel results would increase.  It is encouraging these net pen fish released in February, April and May of 2011  are still showing up in Rufus Woods creel today.  However under current angler pressure these fish will eventually be harvested and eliminated from the system. 

Expansion of the Net Project will allow larger more frequent net pen releases into Lake Rufus Woods and distribution of spring plants into Reservation lakes.  Creel staff will monitor and results will be documented. In 2012,  an updated Lake Rufus Woods Management Plan is being developed and the Annual Stocking Plan is adjusted to meet upto date Reservation water needs. The Rufus Woods Net Pen Project, an extention of the hatchery project, goal is to provide subsistence and recreational fisheries to the tribal membership and sport fishery to non-members by supplementing resident fish through hatchery production.