NATIVEÊ BROODSTOCK ASSESSMENT USING SCIENTIFIC SOURCES

 

Native broodstock hatcheries are also called conservation hatcheries or integrated hatcheries.Ê The purpose of this type of hatchery is to reduce the risk to native, wild salmonids from genetic and ecological changes that reduce reproductive success.

 

The following scientific assessments review conservation hatcheries using native broodstock to rebuild wild populations.

 

Little Sheep Creek, Oregon:ÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊ

 

This hatchery project is jointly operated by the tribes and ODFW and began in 1986.Ê The purpose is to provide summer steelhead for fisheries and to supplement a natural population using hatchery produced fish to increase abundance.Ê The wild summer steelhead in this stream is described as a ãdepleted populationä (NMFS 2004)

 

ãNatural production in Little Sheep Creek has not responded to the supplementation efforts using native Little Sheep Creek hatchery stock (Lower Snake River Conservation Plan 1998).

 

ãThe Little Sheep Creek program appears to have achieved its first goal of supporting fisheries, but has had little or no success to date increasing natural productionä (NMFS 2004).

 

This hatchery program releases 230,000 hatchery summer steelhead smolts per year into Little Sheep Creek and 100,000 smolts into Big Sheep Creek.

 

Source:Ê National Marine Fisheries ServiceÊ -more-

 

Clackamas River Wild Coho Broodstock Program:

 

In 1996 the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife initiated ãrescue/recoveryä hatchery program for wild coho in the Clackamas River in a effort to increase the number of wild coho.Ê ãThis rescue program was initiated in response to the extremely depressed returns observed during the late 1990sä (Mark Chilcote, ODFW).

 

In his analysis of this native broodstock rescue program Chilcote made the following key points:

 

1.                  The smolt to adult survival of ãwild-typeä hatchery fish was nearly 1/10 of the survival rate for wild smolts (97 and 98 brood year production).

 

2.                  Averaging the results of 5 brood years, the total return to the basin was not increased by using wild fish for hatchery broodstock.Ê Just as many total fish would have been produced if there had been no hatchery program at all.

 

3.                  All the hard effort involved in collecting and raising these fish didnât pay off.Ê These results have very serious implications for the use of hatchery program to help restore low Columbia River coho.

 

4.                  We need to find out why this occurred (if we can).Ê If there is no corrective solution, then our tools to help restore lower Columbia River (LCR) coho have been significantly reduced.Ê We need to respond accordingly.

 

ãRemoving wild fish and running them through the hatchery system yielded no more adult offspring than if they had been left in the river.ä

 

ãWhen spawner density begins to fall into the range that we might be concerned about the persistence of the population, we should expect egg to smolt survival to be at its highest.Ê Under such conditions, there will be little benefit to bringing some of the wild fish into the hatchery environment if the resulting hatchery smolts will have ocean survival rates that are 1/10 of those for wild smolts.ä

 

ã·all indications are that hatchery fish, even from wild broodstocks, are not as successful as wild fish in producing viable offspring under natural conditions·ä

 

ãThe survival rates for the hatchery ãrescueä smolts were low; 0.7% for 1999 smolts and 2.2% for 2000 smolts.Ê In contrast, survival rates for wild smolts in the same years were 6.6% and 15.3%.Ê Although, hatchery smolts normally do not survive quite as well as do wild smolts, the difference is generally much less.ä

 

Source:Ê Mark Chilcote memo to Bob Hooton and others, February 1, 2002.Ê ODFW

 

 

Hood River Native Broodstock Program:

 

In 1994 the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife and tribes began to evaluate the reproductive success of native broodstock and compared them to the wild fish they were derived from.Ê Kathryn Kostow evaluated the data collected on wild, native broodstock, and old hatchery stock to determine whether there is a life history and behavior difference between them.Ê The following is taken from the abstract in a paper published by Kostow in 2004.

 

Juvenile phenotypes and fitness as indicated by survival were compared for naturally produced steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss), a new local hatchery stock, and an old nonlocal hatchery stock on the Hood River, Oregon, U.S.A. Although the new hatchery stock and the naturally produced fish came from the same parent gene pool, they differed significantly at every phenotype measured except saltwater age. The characteristics of the new hatchery stock were similar to those of the old hatchery stock. Most of the phenotypic differences were probably environmentally caused. Although such character changes would not be inherited, they may influence the relative fitness of the hatchery and natural fish when they are in the same environment, as selection responds to phenotypic distributions. A difference in fitness between the new hatchery stock and naturally produced fish was indicated by significant survival differences. Acclimation of the new hatchery stock in a ãseminaturalä pond before release was associated with a further decrease in

relative smolt-to-adult survival with little increase in phenotypic similarity between the natural and hatchery fish. These results suggest that modified selection begins immediately in the first generation of a new hatchery stock and may provide a mechanism for genetic change.

 

Kostow notes in her study that ãnew hatchery fishä derived from the wild population and called ãnative brood stockä had poor survival.Ê She said, ãAverage smolt to adult survival for the naturally produced winter and summer steelhead were five to six times higher than for the new hatchery stock. ã

 

Kostow, in her study says, ã·large phenotypic responses by fish from the same parent gene pool to the differences between the captive and natural environments are consistent with the process of domestication.ä

 

She concludes:Ê ãThis study demonstrates large average phenotype and survival differences between hatchery-produced and naturally produced fish from the same parent gene pool.Ê These results indicate that a different selection regime was affecting each of the groups.Ê The processes indicated by these results can be expected to lead to eventual genetic divergence between the new hatchery stock and its wild source population, thus limiting the usefulness of the stock for conservation purposes to only the first few generations.ä

 

Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 61: 577-589, 2004

 

Deschutes River Native Broodstock Evaluation:

 

In 1977, Reg Reisenbichler published a paper about comparing the growth and survival differences between hatchery and wild steelhead.Ê In this study Reisenbichler compared crosses between wild and hatchery fish to wild fish in both the stream and hatchery environments.Ê He found that ãthere were genetic differences in growth rate and survival between the offspring of hatchery and wild steelhead.äÊ The hatchery steelhead were derived from the wild fish in the river and at the time of this work, they were two generations removed from wild gene pool.Ê

 

He found that ãThe observed differences in survival suggested that the short-term effect of hatchery adults spawning in the wild is the production of fewer smolts and ultimately, fewer returning adults than are produced from the same number of only wild spawners.ä

 

Even though the hatchery fish were only two generations removed from the wild population, the hatchery fish survived better in the hatchery ponds and their run timing had changed compared to the wild fish.Ê In contrast the wild fish survival was higher than hatchery fish in the natural streams.

 

J. Fish. Res. Board Can., Vol 24, 1977

 

Contribution of Hatchery Fish to the Natural Productivity of Wild Fish:

 

Ian Fleming and Erik Peterson evaluated the reproductive success of hatchery and wild salmon in nature and found that the hatchery fish productivity was less than that for wild salmon.ÊÊ The reasons for this reduced productivity were stated as:

 

ãHatchery adults appear to show reduced expressions of morphological characters important during breeding, such as secondary sexual characters(color, kype).Ê Such reduced expressions of secondary sexual characters can have negative consequences for natural breeding success.

 

For hatchery females in competition with wild females, indicators of inferior competitive ability include delays in the onset of breeding, fewer nests, and greater retention of eggs. Ultimately, the breeding success of hatchery fish is frequently inferior to that of wild females.

 

The breeding behavior of males appears more strongly affected by hatchery rearing than that of females, reflecting the greater intensity of selection on male competitive ability during this period.Ê Hatchery males tend to be less aggressive and less active courting females and ultimately achieve fewer spawnings than wild males. Hatchery males suffer more from inferior breeding performance than hatchery females.Ê This pattern also appears to carry over into the wild, where gene flow between cultured and wild salmonids is sex based·

 

ãThe most common form of release program is aimed at the supplementation of wild populations, i.e. the intentional integration of hatchery and natural production, with the goal of improving the status of an existing natural population.Ê Such integration, however, entails significant ecological and genetic risks to the wild population.Ê

 

ã·Despite large-scale releases·the supplementation programs must be deemed failures.Ê In none of the studies reporting significant introgression, is there information on whether the release program resulted in improved natural production of the population.

 

2001. Nordic J. Freshw. Res. 75: 71-98.

 

These are a few of many scientific studies published in the peer reviewed scientific literature and this information is available to decision-makers and can be used to develop policies on hatcheries.Ê However, by reading the following quotes by top administrators for NOAA Fisheries in response to news accounts of the federal hatchery policy, it is clear that this scientific literature was not consulted.Ê Bob Lohn, the regional administrator of NOAA Fisheries in Seattle, attended a scientific conference and was surprised to find out the number of times hatcheries do not assist wild salmonids.Ê What is surprising is that he was surprised.Ê

 

The claims made in the quotes below about the benefits of hatcheries, of course, do not provide any specific supporting information.ÊÊ

 

ãRun right, hatcheries can be of considerable value to rebuilding wild fish runs.ä

 

-          Bob Lohn, The Washington Post, April 28, 2004

 

 

 

ã·use hatchery fish more aggressively to restore salmon runs would benefit timber-dependent communities and industries·Ê Experts think this will bring the runs back sooner and in greater numbers.ä

 

-          Mark Rutzic, Legal Advisor to NOAA Fisheries and

Past timber industry lawyer.Ê The New York Times, May 9, 2004

 

ãNOAA is encouraged by improvements in hatchery management, and is seeing their increasing contribution to speeding up the recovery of salmon.ä

 

-          Conrad C. Lautenbacher, Jr.

Vice Admiral, U.S. Navy (Ret.)

Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere.Ê NOAA News Release on the Hatchery Policy.Ê May 13, 2004

 

ãIn a surprising number of instances, hatcheries are being operated in a way that does not assist the natural spawning component of the run.ä

 

-          Bob Lohn, NOAA Fisheries Regional Administrator

The Statesman Journal, Salem, Oregon May 26, 2004

 

ã·used in appropriate cases, typically in the short term·(hatcheries) can bolster the naturally spawning runs.Ê We know because its been done, and it appears to work.ä

 

ÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊ ÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊ ÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊ -Ê Bob Lohn, Seattle Post-Intelligencer, May 29, 2004.