1 / 15

Developing the walla walla hatchery

Developing the walla walla hatchery. Design criteria for maximizing survival. WALLA WALLA RIVER BASIN. South Fork Walla Walla Adult Holding & Spawning Facility. Facility constructed in 1997 by BPA. SOUTH FORK WALLA WALLA ADULT HOLDING & SPAWNING FACILITY.

aure
Download Presentation

Developing the walla walla hatchery

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Developing the wallawalla hatchery Design criteria for maximizing survival

  2. WALLA WALLA RIVER BASIN South Fork Walla Walla Adult Holding & Spawning Facility

  3. Facility constructed in 1997 by BPA SOUTH FORK WALLA WALLA ADULT HOLDING & SPAWNING FACILITY Designed to accommodate a future full production hatchery BPA acquired sufficient property to support construction of the required production facilities Future Incubation and rearing location

  4. Adult holding & spawning • Water intake and screening Existing facilities • Pumps and pipe sizing • Ozone water treatment • Effluent settling pond • Two residences • Site property (18 acres) • Existing water right of 21.15 cfs • (9,497 gallons-per-minute)

  5. Proposed smolt production - new SFWW hatchery - 500,000 juvenile spring Chinook. (Currently direct release 250 K) Localized Production - Incubate, rear, release @ 12 fpp. (Currently off-site @ via Carson NFH @ 17 fpp) Est. SAR @ 0.55 (Current SAR ~ 0.24) 2,750 est. hatchery returns (100% of sub-basin H goal) (Current hatchery returns ~650 or 24% of H goal) Annual harvest goal = 2,000 – 2,500 (All production to be 100% marked for harvest)

  6. No. 1 Objective = Maximize Survival ! Bioprogram METRICS Fish densities established at 0.66 lbs./ft3 for early rearing (indoor) & 0.75 lbs./ft3 for outdoor rearing. Max. density standard – 1.26 lbs / ft3 Density index target of 0.114 during maximum loadings on release date. DI target lower than: The new Chief Joseph Hatchery - 0.125 NEOH Lostine Hatchery – 0.13 Tucannon Hatchery (WDFW) – 0.13 Max. DI standard for Chinook – 0.20 (Piper, 1982)

  7. BIOPROGRAM METRICS (cont’d) Production Needs: Est. egg-take needs for program release goal = 616,000 (for 81% overall survival) Incubator types proposed: Vertical Heath Trays Pros – reliability, accessibility, isolate, hatch Cons – water budget /chiller demands, large footprint, labor intrusive Moist Air Incubators Pros – water budget, chilling, small footprint, reduced labor Cons – accessibility, soft shell, disease control, not a consistent track record (i.e. experience with plugged nozzles, compressor overheating, water exchange

  8. BIOPROGRAM METRICS (cont’d) Est. No. fry to marking size @ 150 fpp for program release goal = 526,680 (95% survival from hatch). Total weight = 3,480 lbs. Early/indoor rearing volume required @ 0.66 lb/ft3 or a DI of 0.237 = 5,272 ft3 (0.3 DI - NEOH) Early rearing containers proposed: Canadian double-deep style (35 ct.x 150 ft3 ea.= 5,250 ft3)

  9. Bioprogram values (cont’d) Total lbs. / production @ release > 41,667 41,667 lbs. / 0.75 lb/ft3= 55,556 ft3 final rearing volume needed Final rearing proposed: Concrete raceways (10’ x 90’ x 4’d) 55,556 ft3/ 3,600 ft3 = 15.4 – or – 16 total raceways

  10. Rearing requirements (cont’d) Peak facility flows for final rearing = 8,710 gpm (~545 gpm / raceway) Lbs. / gpm = 4.8 (common metric < 10 lbs. / gpm - per Piper, et. Al.)

  11. density criteria what & why? Spring Chinook. Relationship between lower rearing densities and higher survival/adult contributions. Joe Banks density/survival study (USFWS, 1994-95) 1,200 ft3raceways of 20K– 40K –60KChSsmolts DI’s of 0.16– 0.32 –0.48@ 18 fpp Densities of 0.93– 1.85 –2.78lbs./ft3

  12. Results & decisions Highest number of adult returns? 20K groups Lowest number of adult returns? 60K groups With flows adjusted in each group . . . . . 200 – 400 – 600 gpm Fish reared on 600 gpm from each population group yielded highest number of adults . . . . BUT 20 k group on 200 gpm flow yielded more adults than any of the other higher density groups on 600 gpm.

  13. Results & decisions (cont’d) Priority for low densities to give fish the greatest adult survival advantage, especially when poor post-release conditions are present. Second priority for low flow index, but based on the Banks study, is secondary to density for survival benefits. No. of rearing vessels based on these criteria will improve hatchery effectiveness.

  14. Results & decisions (cont’d) Currently re-evaluating raceways v. circulars and effects on flows/velocities for improved exercise as it relates to increasing survival. Currently re-evaluating incubation types.

  15. Questions / discussion

More Related