FY07-09 proposal 198335000

Jump to Reviews and Recommendations

Section 1. Administrative

Contacts

Section 2. Locations

Province / subbasin: Mountain Snake / Clearwater

Section 3. Focal species

Section 4. Past accomplishments

Section 5. Relationships to other projects

Section 6. Biological objectives

Section 7. Work elements (coming back to this)

Section 8. Budgets

Itemized estimated budget

Total estimated FY 2007-2009 budgets

Cost sharing

Section 9. Project future

Future O&M costs: FY 2010 - Includes $15,000 inflation adjustment and $95,000 for the replacement of BPA owned vehicles ( 2 - one ton diesel flatbed trucks). FY 2011 - Includes $15,000 inflation adjustment and $110,000 for the replacement of BPA owned vehicle ( 1 Kenworth 20' Flatbed truck). Operations and Maintenace will continue, at least, through the year 2022.

Termination date: 'none'
Comments:

Final deliverables: The project will provide the following deliverables: monthly and quarterly reports, yearly "Final" annual report, yearly Annual Operation Plan (AOP), Hatchery Review Team (HRT) report regarding the operation and performance of Nez Perce Tribal Hatchery.

Section 10. Narrative and other documents

Reviews and recommendations

ISRP PRELIMINARY REVIEW (Jun 2, 2006)

Recommendation: Response requested

NPCC comments: A response is needed from the sponsors of this proposal that brings reviewers up-to-date on progress toward interim goals described for Phase 1, including returning numbers, smolt releases, smolt-to-adult return rates (SARs), etc. The proposal is well done, although superficial on details of releases relative to the Phase I and Phase 2 objectives and presentation of any results on performance by hatchery stocks at the interim management points. Given the well-described logic path in the first part of this proposal's narrative, reviewers expected to see some evaluation of recent performance versus stated goals. Technical and scientific background: This section contains technical items but very little scientific background. The abundant literature on results and consequences of releasing hatchery-produced fish of this and related species into waters is not discussed as it may pertain to the project. The section does contain a lot of information that would fit nicely into the proposal section on rationale but doesn’t fit well into the technical section. The most recent prior ISRP review recommended “Fundable at the Phase 1 level only”. The ISRP noted that future funding would likely be contingent upon proposals better addressing longstanding ISRP concerns from previous reviews and presentation of Phase 1 M&E results. Implementation of the full-scale production program (Phase Two) will be dependent on M&E results from the first phase of the program. It is important that the NPTH production remain at the reduced Phase I level throughout this initial review and evaluation period. The concerns of the ISRP in that review remain relevant to this 2006 review: “The ISRP remains concerned that planning for the hatchery and its M&E include all possible management and response alternatives including termination of the program due to either success or failure in achieving program objectives. As noted in FY00 review, the ISRP recommends that a full and consistent decision tree be developed as the program moves forward. The tree should specify all triggers, including intermediate levels and timelines that if not achieved would forestall Phase 2 construction, or even lead to termination of the program itself. The history of fisheries management in the Columbia River basin is replete with projects that failed to achieve their objectives in part or even completely. Thus, in spite of the need for this project, and the enthusiasm of its implementers, it would seem prudent to plan for all possible outcomes.” The major issue currently in play for this supplementation project is as follows: The NPTH has two phases of construction management. These phases are the result of issues arising during the Final Design process. During that process, the Council approved construction of a smaller scale, more temporary NPTH program, based on concerns by the ISRP in their FY2000 review. Implementation of the full-scale production program (Phase Two) will be dependent on M&E results from the first phase of the program. As a result of the smaller scale of Phase 1, production numbers were decreased and facility infrastructure was designed to meet a reduced cost. The original design target production for NPTH was 2.8 million fall Chinook sub-yearlings and 768,000 spring Chinook juveniles. Revised Phase I production goals were set at 1.4 million fall Chinook sub-yearlings and 625,000 spring Chinook juveniles and biological triggers for each stock were established for the implementation of Phase II (Table 1). Summary of Biological Triggers for phased expansion of NPTHC. Stock: Spring Chinook Biological Trigger: Smolt-to-adult return rates for NPTH produced spring Chinook salmon in Lolo and Newsome creeks meet or exceed 0.4% for 4 out of 5 years (approximately 546 returning adults to the Clearwater River subbasin from Phase I production). Stock: Fall Chinook Biological Trigger: Returning NPTH adults to Site 1705 sufficient to produce 500,000 sub-yearling smolts (approximately 800 returning adults to the Clearwater River subbasin from Phase I production). Stock: Early-Fall Chinook Biological Trigger: Returning naturally produced adults to Luke’s Gulch or Cedar Flats sufficient to produce 100,000 sub-yearling smolts (approximately 120 to 170 returning adults to the Clearwater River subbasin from early-fall Chinook natural production)." M&E is the subject of a companion proposal (Project 198335003) and is not directly covered here. The M&E will address possible expansion to Phase 2. The first complete set of adults should return by end of 2007. A symposium is planned for the following year. The benefits to focal species are unknown pending supplementation analysis. Objectives: Long- and short-term goals are given and are well described in considerable detail. The efficacy of NATURES rearing technique is being assessed. The methods are adequate, but lacking detail.

ISRP FINAL REVIEW (Aug 31, 2006)

Recommendation: Fundable

NPCC comments: While the ISRP recommends the project as fundable, the ISRP also expects the sponsors to do a better job of reporting results in their future proposals. The Project History reports only actions performed, e.g., the planning and creation of the hatchery, and numbers of fish of different sorts stocked each year since releases began in 2003. Adult return rates cannot yet be reported, of course, but it would be helpful to have information for each released group on egg-to-smolt survival and on smolt survival to points downstream. Reasons for variation in such results should be discussed, including comparison with literature values. In their response, the sponsors provided additional data and explanations, and these seem adequate; however, in future review cycles, sponsors could do a better job of following the topical outline for proposals.