FY07-09 proposal 200001400
Jump to Reviews and Recommendations
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Evaluate Population Dynamics And Habitat Use Of Lampreys In Cedar Creek (Lewis River Subbasin), Washington. |
| Proposal ID | 200001400 |
| Organization | USFWS-Columbia River Fisheries Program Office |
| Short description | The distribution, abundance and status of lamprey in the Columbia River Basin is largely unknown. We propose to investigate these characteristics as well as the methods used to assess these characteristics for lamprey in Cedar Creek. |
| Information transfer | Information generated from this work will be formally transferred to (for example) scientists, managers and policy makers primarily through quarterly and annual reports (hard and electronic copies), peer-review publications as well as presentations at management forums and technical meetings. In addition, information will be transferred through participation on the Columbia River Lamprey Technical Workgroup which is administered by CBFWA. Information generated from this work will be informally transferred to (for example) scientists, managers and policy makers primarily through memos, phone calls and emails. |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
Contacts
| Contact | Organization | |
|---|---|---|
| Form submitter | ||
| Timothy Whitesel | USFWS, CRFPO | timothy_whitesel@fws.gov |
| All assigned contacts | ||
| Christina Luzier | U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service | christina_luzier@fws.gov |
| Howard Schaller | USFWS-CRFPO | howard_schaller@fws.gov |
| Timothy Whitesel | USFWS, CRFPO | timothy_whitesel@fws.gov |
Section 2. Locations
Province / subbasin: Lower Columbia / Lewis
| Latitude | Longitude | Waterbody | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 45 56'06 N | 122 37'03 W | Cedar Creek | Includes Cedar Creek in its entirety, plus all tributaries to Cedar Creek, as well as the mouth of the Lewis River. |
Section 3. Focal species
primary: Pacific Lampreysecondary: River Lamprey
secondary: Western Brook Lamprey
Section 4. Past accomplishments
| Year | Accomplishments |
|---|---|
| 2005 | Annual Report to BPA (in progress); Three publications: Stone and Barndt, 2005, J. Freshwater Ecol. 20(1)171-175; Stone, McGree and Whitesel, 2005, N. Amer. J. Fish. Mgmt. 2006; Stone, 2005, Northwest. Nat. In Press; USFWS seminar program |
| 2004 | Annual report to BPA; Project presentation to CBFWA; Invited presentations at AFS Idaho Lamprey Workshop and Lamprey Technical Workgroup Symposium; Presentation at WA State Univ., Clark County Watershed, USFWS seminar program, Ridgefield Env. Symp. |
| 2003 | Annual report to BPA; Poster presentation at Oregon AFS meeting (Caught In the Act! – A Photo Documentation of a Pacific Lamprey (Lampetra tridentata) Spawning Event); Project presentation to Fish First |
| 2002 | Annual report to BPA; Two presented talks at Oregon AFS meeting (Movement/Spawning Activity of Adult PCL in Cedar Creek and Factors Contributing to the Movement of Juvenile PCL in Cedar Creek); Project presentation to USFWS Region 1 and BPA |
| 2001 | Annual report to BPA; Two poster presentations at Oregon AFS meeting (Habitat Use and Population Dynamics of Lamprey in Cedar Creek, WA and Life Cycle of Pacific Lamprey); Presentation to Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation (CTUIR) |
| 2000 | Annual report to BPA |
Section 5. Relationships to other projects
| Funding source | Related ID | Related title | Relationship |
|---|---|---|---|
| BPA | 199402600 | Pacific Lamprey Population Sta | This project researches larval lamprey density and abundances of larval, metamorphosed and adult lampreys in the Umatilla River. This research enhances the research being performed in Cedar Creek and the overall effort to determine status and distribution of Pacific lampreys in the Columbia River Basin, two critical uncertainties outlined by the Columbia River Basin Lamprey Technical Workgroup. Consulations are made with this research team regarding sampling and results. |
| BPA | 200201600 | Lamprey Abundance | This project researches larval lamprey density and abundances of outmigrant and adult lampreys in the Deschutes River Subbasin. This research enhances the research being performed in Cedar Creek and the overall effort to determine status and distribution of Pacific lampreys in the Columbia River Basin, two critical uncertainties outlined by the Columbia River Basin Lamprey Technical Workgroup. Consulations are made with this research team regarding sampling and results. |
| BPA | 200002800 | Eval Pacific Lamprey In Clearw | This project researches distribution, life history strategies, habitat requirements and abundances of Pacific lampreys in the Clearwater River Drainage, Idaho. This research enhances the research being performed in Cedar Creek and the overall effort to determine status, distribution and biology and ecology of Pacific lampreys in the Columbia River Basin and tributaries, three critical uncertainties outlined by the Columbia River Basin Lamprey Technical Workgroup. Consulations are made with this research team regarding sampling and results. |
| Other: CBFWA | [no entry] | Columbia River Basin Lamprey Technical Workgroup | The Cedar Creek project has a representative on the Lamprey Technical Workgroup. Sampling techniques and results from Cedar Creek are used to guide decision making regarding critical uncertainties and funding. |
| Other: USFWS | [no entry] | USFWS Lamprey Status Review | Data from the Cedar Creek project were solicited for the status review of four species of lamprey in the Pacific Northwest. We provided historical data and results from Cedar Creek which aided the status review team in their findings. |
| Other: NWPCC | [no entry] | Subbasin Plans | Data on Pacific and Western brook lampreys from the Cedar Creek project were used in the development of the Lower Columbia River Subbasin Plan. |
| BPA | 200303600 | CBFWA Monitor/Eval Program | Our efforts to help coordinate and assist in the development of sampling protocols which facilitate standard approaches to monitoring lamprey, the results of which could be rolled up across multplie geographical scales, are consistent with the missions of the Pacific Northwest Aquatic Monitoring Partnership (PNAMP) and the Collaborative Systemwide Monitoring and Evaluation Project (CSMEP). Project personnel will participate in the CSMEP process to insure that lamprey considerations are present. |
Section 6. Biological objectives
| Biological objectives | Full description | Associated subbasin plan | Strategy |
|---|---|---|---|
| Determine the capture efficiency for larvae. | Task 1.1. Evaluate the effect of larval size on capture efficiency. Task 1.2. Evaluate the effect of larval density on capture efficiency. Task 1.3. Evaluate the effect of habitat type on larval capture efficiency. Task 1.4. Use the information from Tasks 1.1-1.3 to develop a model (or models) that predict (or estimate) what larval capture efficiency would be (or how it is influenced) under various conditions of larval size, density and the habitat in which they are found. Test the efficacy of those models by sampling for larval lamprey at selected sites and comparing the results of electrofishing to dredging techniques (see Bergstedt and Genovese 1994,). Calculate capture efficiency under filed conditions using the approach of Steeves et al. (2003). | Lower Columbia | Determine the degree of spawning site fidelity; identifying spawning locations, habitat characteristics; determining habitat requirements and duration of freshwater residency of juvenile lamprey; rectify difficulties in abundance estimates. |
| Develop a Quantitative Assessment Sampling Program | Task 4.1. Based on the measured or perceived habitat characteristics and larval lamprey densities in the Lewis River subbasin (LRS), divide tributaries into sampling units. Task 4.2. Determine specific sample sites as well as sampling periods and frequency, making sure that all sites would be sampled a minimum of once every 2-4 years. Task 4.3. Develop a 2-stage sample design for estimating the total area of larval habitat and the density of larvae in the LRS. Task 4.4. Develop larval habitat classifications, based on the 3 strata described in Slade et al. (2003), and an approach to physically assess larval habitat from the LRS. Task 4.5. Develop a plan to conduct larval lamprey sampling, using a single pass, standard effort over a measured area. This plan should use standard electrofishing parameters, including those developed in Objectives 1-3 of this proposal. Task 4.6. Develop an approach to calculate larval density and abundance. This calculation would require information on capture efficiencies. Task 4.7. Based on the information gathered in Objective 2 of this proposal (on larval growth and the probability of metamorphosis) and the sampling planned in Task 4.5, develop an approach to estimate the production of macropthalmia from tributaries in the LRS. Task 4.8. Synthesize a Quantitative Assessment Sampling Program for the LRS as a template for the CRB. Sea lamprey biologists have used the QAS Program to estimate the abundance of larvae and, in turn, apply this information to estimate the production of macropthalmia. In summary, QAS involves 1) identifying randomly-selected sample reaches in streams throughout a subbasin, 2) describing habitat in the subbasin using a three-strata classification, 3) conducting larval sampling using single-pass electrofishing at a standardized rate and 4) using information on capture efficiency to estimate larval density, abundance and size structure, 5) applying information on the probability of metamorphosis to estimate macropthalmia production. | Lower Columbia | The identification of status, limiting factors, and management alternatives for lamprey is also a high priority. |
| Estimate spawning abundance and habitat use. | Task 3.1. Install and maintain at least two PIT tag arrays (PTA) in Cedar Creek. One PTA should be located near the mouth (to record PIT-tagged lamprey moving out of Cedar Creek). The other PTAs should be located above the adult trap locations in Cedar Creek. Task 3.2. To capture adults, deploy Pot traps just above the mouth of Cedar Creek and above the upper PTA. Task 3.3. PIT-tag each of the adults that is captured near the mouth. Release some of these adults downstream of the traps to calculate trap efficiency. Hold some of these adults in the traps to determine retention rates. Release the remainder of the adults upstream of the traps to monitor migration. Task 3.4. Calculate the net movement of adult lamprey into and out of Cedar Creek. Use trap efficiencies and mark-recapture methods to estimate the total number of adults in Cedar Creek. Task 3.5. Develop a probabilistic sampling framework for nest surveys by determining a set of spatially-balanced, random sample sites. Task 3.6. Conduct census surveys for nests throughout the spawning season. Task 3.7. During spawning ground surveys, conduct tests to measure the accuracy (by actually excavating a small portion of randomly subset of what are believed to be nests) and precision (by conducting multiple, independent surveys in the same area) of nest enumeration. Task 3.8. Determine the amount of time nests are visible to surveyors. Task 3.9. Use the information collected above to estimate the total number of nests, calculate a fish to nest ratio, and evaluate how well probabilistic surveys represent census data. Task 3.10. Evaluate the habitat associations of spawning activity by conducting habitat surveys at use and non-use locations. | Lower Columbia | Determine the degree of spawning site fidelity; identifying spawning locations, habitat characteristics; determining habitat requirements and duration of freshwater residency of juvenile lamprey; rectify difficulties in abundance estimates. |
| Estimate the abundance of macropthalmia. | Task 2.1. Collect approximately 50 larval lamprey in the fall and spring. Based on literature for other species, collect lamprey that are above and below suspected threshold values for metamorphosis to initiate (e.g. total length = 100 mm, condition factor = 1.20). Task 2.2. Measure the total length and weight of each lamprey as well as calculate their condition factor. Apply elastomer marks to identify each individual. Task 2.3. Collect approximately 24 larvae to evaluate whether condition factor is related to lipid content. Compare calculated condition factors to lipid content measured using standard chloroform-ether extractions (CEE). Use this data to evaluate whether condition factor can be used as a surrogate for lipid content in larval lamprey. Task 2.4. If lipid content is a good predictor of transformation in lamprey, it will be necessary to determine a non-lethal method to measure lipid in naturally-produced animals. Hydrostatic weighing (HW) (Brozek et al. 1963) and total body electrical conductivity (TOBEC) (Novinger and Del Rio 1999) may be useful in this regard. We will collect a minimum of 24 larvae and measure their lipid content using each method. Lipid content from each of these methods will then be regressed on that derived from the CEE protocol (known value). If we can determine an accurate and non-lethal manner to measure lipid content in larval lamprey, we will use that to measure lipid content of all animals used in Task 2.2. Task 2.5. Rear all the larvae in a lab, using standard rearing procedures already developed for Pacific lamprey (M. McGree Personal Communication). Evaluate the proportion that go through metamorphosis the following season. Task 2.6. Evaluate ability of physical characteristics to predict metamorphosis. Use a logistic regression to examine the probability of metamorphosis as a function of various morphological characteristics. Describe the model that best fits the data. Task 2.7. If model appears robust, determine an area and project that is able to make a rigorous calculation of juvenile lamprey migrating from an area. Apply the predictive model to that area, estimate the proportion of larvae that will migrate and test accuracy of the model. | Lower Columbia | Planning for the NF and EF Lewis River Subbasin also identifies a lack of data and little research on Pacific lamprey, both of which are considered necessary. |
| Transfer and disseminate information | Task 5.1. Prepare Quarterly Reports. Task 5.2. Prepare Annual Reports. Task 5.3. Prepare manuscripts for peer-review and journal publication. Task 5.4. Make presentations at technical and professional meetings. | Lower Columbia | The identification of status, limiting factors, and management alternatives for lamprey is also a high priority. |
Section 7. Work elements (coming back to this)
| Work element name | Work element title | Description | Start date | End date | Est budget |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data | Conduct experiments testing the effect of larval size, density and habitat type on capture probability and efficiency | Controlled trials will be perfomed to measure the effects of various factors on capture probability and efficiency. Larval lamprey of known sizes and densities will be seeded in one meter squared net pens and removed with a consistent electroshocking regime to generate data on the capture probability and efficiency of varying size larvae at varying densities (2007). Larval lamprey of constant size and density will be seeded in one meter squared pens with varying habitat and removed with a consistent electroshocking regime to generate data on the capture probability and effieciency of larvae in varying habitats (2008). | 8/1/2007 | 9/30/2008 | $70,000 |
|
Biological objectives Determine the capture efficiency for larvae. |
Metrics |
||||
| Analyze/Interpret Data | Evaluate the effect of larval size, density and habitat type on capture probability and efficiency | The results of electrofishing trials will be evaluated relative to larval lamprey size, density and habitat type. The ability of the electroshocker to detect presence of larvae of varying sizes and densities will be determined (2007). The capture efficiency will be calculated for varying sizes and densities of larvae (2007). Capture probability and efficiency will be evaluated for larvae in varying habitat types (2008). | 10/1/2007 | 12/31/2008 | $41,788 |
|
Biological objectives Determine the capture efficiency for larvae. |
Metrics |
||||
| Analyze/Interpret Data | Develop predictive models of capture efficiency | Using data obtained from Objective 1 in FY 2007 and 2008, a predictive model of capture efficiency will be developed. To test the efficacy of the model, sampling for larval lamprey at selected sites will be performed and the results compared to dredging techniques. Capture efficiency will be calculated under field conditions. | 1/1/2009 | 7/31/2009 | $39,325 |
|
Biological objectives Determine the capture efficiency for larvae. |
Metrics |
||||
| Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data | Conduct field sampling for larval lamprey using predictive models of capture efficiency | Upon the development of predictive models of capture efficiency, the efficacy of those models will be tested by sampling for larval lamprey at selected field sites. | 6/1/2009 | 9/30/2009 | $40,000 |
|
Biological objectives Determine the capture efficiency for larvae. |
Metrics |
||||
| Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data | Collect larval lamprey, measure biological characteristics and lipid content | Fifty larval lamprey will be collected in the fall (2007) and spring (2008). Weight and length will be recorded and condition factor calculated. Each fish will be given a unique elastomer mark and reared in the lab. All fish will be monitored for metamorphosis. Twenty-four larval lamprey will be collected in 2007. Their conditon factor will be calculated and lipid content measured by chloroform-ether extraction (CEE). Twenty-four additional larvae will be collected in 2008. Their lipid content will be determined by hydrostatic weighing and total body electrical conductivity, both non-lethal methods. The known lipid content obtained from CEE will be compared with the non-lethal methods to determine the most accurate, non-lethal method to be used in future lipid analysis. | 4/1/2007 | 5/31/2008 | $100,000 |
|
Biological objectives Estimate the abundance of macropthalmia. |
Metrics |
||||
| Analyze/Interpret Data | Evaluate lipid content, condition factor and probability of metamorphosis | The relationship between condition factor and lipid content(derived from chloroform-ether extraction (CEE)) will be examined to evaluate if condition factor can be used as a surrogate for lipid content in larval lamprey (2007). Lipid content derived from non-lethal methods will be regressed on that derived from CEE to determine an accurate, non-lethal method to measure lipid content (2008). A logistic regression will be used to examine the probability of metamorphosis as a function of various morphological characteristics. The model that best fits the data will be described (2009). | 4/1/2007 | 12/31/2009 | $71,113 |
|
Biological objectives Estimate the abundance of macropthalmia. |
Metrics |
||||
| Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data | Collect adult Pacific lamprey | At least two PIT tag arrays will be installed and maintained in Cedar Creek. One will be deployed at the mouth and the other above the adult trap locations at river km 4. Adult Pacific lampreys will be collected in the fish ladder and in pot traps just above both PIT tag arrays. Each adult captured at the mouth will be PIT tagged. Some will be released downstream of the mouth to calculate trap efficiency. Some will be retained in the pots to test retention rates and the remainder will be released upstream of the mouth to monitor migration. | 4/1/2007 | 12/31/2009 | $111,787 |
|
Biological objectives Estimate spawning abundance and habitat use. |
Metrics |
||||
| Analyze/Interpret Data | Calculate net movement of adult Pacific lamprey into and out of Cedar Creek | Trap efficiencies and mark-recapture methods will be used to calculate the net movement of adult lampreys as well as total number of adults in Cedar Creek. | 4/1/2007 | 12/31/2009 | $25,556 |
|
Biological objectives Estimate spawning abundance and habitat use. |
Metrics |
||||
| Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data | Conduct nest census and habitat association surveys | A probabilistic sampling framework for nest surveys will be developed by determining a set of spatially-balanced, random sample sites. Nest surveys will be conducted throughout the spawning season. Nest accuracy, precision and longevity will be determined. Habitat associated with spawning acitivity will be evaluated by conducting habitat surveys at use and non-use locations. | 4/1/2007 | 7/31/2009 | $80,000 |
|
Biological objectives Estimate spawning abundance and habitat use. |
Metrics |
||||
| Analyze/Interpret Data | Analyze nest census and habitat association data | Data collected from nest census surveys will be used to estimate the total number of nests, calculate a fish to nest ratio and evaluate how well probabilistic surveys represent census data. Habitat associated with spawning activity will be evaluated. | 4/1/2007 | 12/31/2009 | $25,556 |
|
Biological objectives Estimate spawning abundance and habitat use. |
Metrics |
||||
| Develop RM&E Methods and Designs | Develop larval lamprey sampling design | Based on measured or perceived habitat characteristics and larval lamprey densities in the Lewis River subbasin (LRS), the tributaries will be divided into sampling units. Specific sample sites, periods and frequency will also be determined. A two-stage sample design will be designed for estimating the total area of larval habitat and the density of larvae in the LRS. Larval habitat classifications and an approach to physically assess larval habitat will be developed. A larval sampling plan will be designed. | 1/1/2007 | 12/31/2008 | $60,000 |
|
Biological objectives Develop a Quantitative Assessment Sampling Program |
Metrics |
||||
| Develop RM&E Methods and Designs | Synthesis of a Quantitative Assessment Sampling Program | Using information from capture efficiencies collected in Objective 1, an approach to calculate larval density and abundance will be developed. Based on information gathered in Objective 2 and the sampling planned in Objective 4, an approach to estimate the production of macropthalmia from tributaries in the Lewis River subbasin (LRS) will be developed. A Quantitative Assessment Sampling Program will be developed for the LRS as a template for the Columbia River basin. | 1/1/2009 | 12/31/2009 | $59,325 |
|
Biological objectives Develop a Quantitative Assessment Sampling Program |
Metrics |
||||
| Other | Produce Quarterly Reports | Quarterly reports will be submitted using the Pisces on-line reporting system. | 4/1/2007 | 1/15/2010 | $1,200 |
|
Biological objectives Transfer and disseminate information |
Metrics |
||||
| Produce Annual Report | Produce Annual Report | Data generated will be analyzed and summarized in an annual report. | 1/1/2007 | 4/1/2010 | $60,000 |
|
Biological objectives Transfer and disseminate information |
Metrics |
||||
| Other | Publications and Meetings | Manuscripts will be prepared for submission into peer-reviewed journals. Data and results will be presented at technical and professional meetings. | 1/1/2007 | 4/1/2010 | $30,000 |
|
Biological objectives Transfer and disseminate information |
Metrics |
||||
| Produce Environmental Compliance Documentation | Ensure Environmental Compliance Requirements Have Been Met | SOWs and supporting documents will be submitted as needed for BPA's Environmental Compliance Group to determine environmental compliance status. | 1/1/2007 | 12/31/2009 | $600 |
|
Biological objectives Transfer and disseminate information |
Metrics |
||||
| Manage and Administer Projects | Project Contract Administration | Covers work to manage on the ground efforts associated with the project. Also covers administrative work in support of on the groung efforts and in support of BPA's programmatic requirements such as financial reporting, and development of a SOW pacakge (includes draft SOW, budget, spending cap, and property inventory). | 1/1/2007 | 12/31/2009 | $1,500 |
|
Biological objectives Transfer and disseminate information |
Metrics |
||||
Section 8. Budgets
Itemized estimated budget
| Item | Note | FY07 | FY08 | FY09 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Personnel | Supervisory Biol. (2) | $7,000 | $7,500 | $8,000 |
| Personnel | Lead Project Biol. (26) | $47,500 | $50,000 | $52,500 |
| Personnel | Asst. Project Biol. (26) | $37,500 | $40,000 | $42,500 |
| Personnel | Field Biol. (22) | $25,000 | $27,500 | $30,000 |
| Fringe Benefits | Total Personnel (.30) | $35,100 | $37,500 | $39,900 |
| Travel | plus vehicle | $7,500 | $7,500 | $7,500 |
| Supplies | [blank] | $50,000 | $10,000 | $10,000 |
| Capital Equipment | none | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Overhead | 0.309, 0.10 | $85,750 | $74,000 | $78,000 |
| Totals | $295,350 | $254,000 | $268,400 | |
Total estimated FY 2007-2009 budgets
| Total itemized budget: | $817,750 |
| Total work element budget: | $817,750 |
Cost sharing
| Funding source/org | Item or service provided | FY 07 est value ($) | FY 08 est value ($) | FY 09 est value ($) | Cash or in-kind? | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| USFWS | Misc. equipment and vehicle | $15,000 | $15,000 | $15,000 | In-Kind | Under Development |
| WDFW | Assistance | $5,000 | $5,000 | $5,000 | In-Kind | Under Development |
| Totals | $20,000 | $20,000 | $20,000 | |||
Section 9. Project future
|
FY 2010 estimated budget: $278,000 FY 2011 estimated budget: $278,000 |
Comments: Based on a level budget from 2007-2009, plus the expected cost of inflation. |
Future O&M costs:
Termination date: 2012
Comments: The collection of baseline data should be complete and a Quantitative Assessment Sampling Program for the Lewis River subbasin should be designed and established at the end of FY09. Routine assessments for long term trend and status information would need to continue. This work would be lead by the USFWS.
Final deliverables: Annual Report. Completion Report. Quantitative Assessment Sampling Program design.
Section 10. Narrative and other documents
| [Attached Document] | Jul 2006 |
| [Attached Document] | Jul 2006 |
Reviews and recommendations
| FY07 budget | FY08 budget | FY09 budget | Total budget | Type | Category | Recommendation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NPCC FINAL FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS (Oct 23, 2006) [full Council recs] | ||||||
| $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | Expense | ProvinceExpense | Fund Pending Available Funds |
| NPCC DRAFT FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS (Sep 15, 2006) [full Council recs] | ||||||
| $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | ProvinceExpense | ||
ISRP PRELIMINARY REVIEW (Jun 2, 2006)
Recommendation: Response requested
NPCC comments: The Project History needs to include a clearer presentation of results and accomplishments, organized by the objectives in the original proposal, not by year. A synthesis of results from the past six years work -- a bottom line -- also is needed. The M&E part of the proposal needs to be expanded. Currently, the M&E aspects of the proposal read like a plan to develop an M&E plan. The sponsors need to indicate whether ongoing monitoring work will continue and, if so, provide objectives for this work. The Quantitative Assessment Sampling Program needs further explanation. Technical and scientific background: The proposal provides an excellent explanation of lamprey ecology and a comprehensive literature review, including an acknowledgement of the possible importance of the marine environment. The proposal, however, does not explain the specific situation in Cedar Creek very well. There is no map of the watershed and so the location of the sampling sites, barriers etc. cannot be determined. The year-to-year narrative could be summarized in a few tables. There is a lot of qualitative description (mean values without variances, some of the sample sizes seem very small). Rationale and significance to subbasin plans and regional programs: The proposal clearly outlines relationships to three subbasin plans. The proposed work appears to address critical uncertainties identified by the Columbia River Basin Lamprey Technical Workgroup. Relationships to other projects: The sponsors identify relationships with three lamprey projects, and the sponsors are active in the Lamprey Technical Working Group. They state that the related projects are attempting to use similar sampling protocols. Otherwise there does not seem to be any direct collaboration among projects. Project history: Quite a bit of work appears to have been done since 2000, but the way in which the results are presented and, in some cases, the unnecessary level of detail makes assessment of the project’s progress extremely difficult. The results should be organized by objectives in the original proposal so that progress toward accomplishing the objectives can be assessed. A map of the basin is needed for reference. Data and results of analyses are given in the text, but tables or graphs could provide better way of displaying the results and especially trends through the years. The results should be synthesized and major conclusions should be stated. Major knowledge gaps should be identified. The project history should provide a clear justification for future work. Objectives: The sponsors make a reasonable case that improvements in sampling methodology are needed to more accurately estimate lamprey abundance. The objectives, however, are broad and often only generally relate to the actual tasks. For example, Objective 1 is “Provide information to assess the distribution and habitat associations as well as abundance and status of Pacific lamprey ammocoetes (larvae)” but the actual objective is to estimate capture probability and gear efficiency. The tasks are well focused and quantitative, and relate to habitat as well as population dynamics and behavior. The schedule for research results is well laid out. The proposed work is largely experimental and directed at improving sampling methods. Does this mean that the adult and larval assessments that were ongoing for six years will be discontinued? A better explanation and justification for the proposed Quantitative Assessment Sampling Program is needed. What is this program and how is this approach different from what is currently being done? Why is it needed? Has this Program been coordinated with other lamprey projects and the Lamprey Technical Working Group? Has there been any concern that lamprey might react to pesticides that reach the water due to agricultural application? Lipid sampling might provide an avenue for detection. Tasks (work elements) and methods: With some exceptions, the proposal pays good attention to sampling details, efficiency, and statistical aspects of population enumeration. Methods are clearly explained. The development of "predictive models of capture efficiency" is not well explained. However the model (whatever it is) will be verified by ground-truthing larvae abundance. Monitoring and evaluation: Monitoring programs for the research are explained but the sponsors do not plan on implementing "proven" M&E methods until 2012. "Routine assessments" would be needed after that, but there is no mention of who would do them. The proposal to develop a probabilistic sampling protocol to estimate total abundance is good. Facilities, equipment, and personnel are adequate. Information transfer: Results will be disseminated via quarterly and annual reports, peer-reviewed publications, and presentations at professional meetings. The sponsors have a good track record of peer reviewed papers, reports, and public presentations. Data are archived and available to the public. The plan for immediate sharing of results is excellent, but discussion of long-term storage of appropriate data and meta-data is not provided. Benefits to focal and non-focal species: Focal species likely will benefit from the work. The proposed research will yield new information on all species of lampreys in the basin. The sponsors should consider effects of trapping and electrofishing on focal salmonids, non-salmonids, and mammals. The sponsors do not discuss precautions that would be taken to reduce effects on non-target species such as salmonids.
ISRP FINAL REVIEW (Aug 31, 2006)
Recommendation: Fundable
NPCC comments: The sponsors have successfully addressed the ISRP's concerns and the project should be funded. They provide an excellent summary of past accomplishments that clearly demonstrates the need for the proposed work, and did a good job of reporting results of previous work The following sentences, extracted from the rewritten proposal, provide good rationale for supporting the revised project: "Continuing this work allows managers to maintain one of the longer time series of information on lamprey in the CRB. Finally, the results of the work in Cedar Creek (i.e. capture efficiency) are applicable to and can help guide sampling efforts and assessments in other CRB tributaries" The sponsors identify significant problems with current sampling techniques for estimating larval abundance and propose to develop a rigorous protocol for estimating abundance that could be applicable across the basin. The objectives are clearer and more focused than in the original proposal. The additional information on sampling sites, methods, and collaboration resulted in a much clearer explanation of the work. The sponsors satisfactorily addressed the ISRP’s question about metadata. This project is clearly one of the more well-organized and productive lamprey projects in the Columbia River Basin. Continuing work at this location is important because it is the only lamprey sampling site located below the mainstem dams, providing the opportunity to compare trends in abundance of lamprey populations not affected by mainstem dams with those occurring above the dams. Programmatic Comments of the ISRP were not addressed, although it appears that the sponsors were not made aware of them. The primary comment is the ISRP’s recommendation for an oversight group to assign responsibilities among the lamprey projects being funded, and to assure that most efficient use is made of funds to enable application of results among tributaries across the Columbia Basin. This proposal discusses the Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Authority’s Lamprey Technical Working Group as a mechanism for identifying and prioritizing critical uncertainties associated with restoration of lamprey in the Columbia Basin. The ISRP and the sponsor’s response point to the need for oversight of efforts with lamprey studies to eliminate unnecessary duplication of effort.