FY07-09 proposal 200728100
Jump to Reviews and Recommendations
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Washington Salmonid Abundance and Productivity Monitoring Framework |
| Proposal ID | 200728100 |
| Organization | Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) |
| Short description | Develops a statewide framework for monitoring the VSP parameters of juvenile and adult abundance and productivity for ESA listed salmonids. Implements monitoring at sites specified in the framework and enables prioritization of monitoring efforts. |
| Information transfer | Annual estimates of juvenile abundance, escapement, productivity, and percents of juvenile abundance and productivity targets achieved will be available through the Natural Resources Information Portal (http://www.swim.wa.gov/). The data will be maintained on the Wild Salmon Population Monitoring web site (http://wdfw.wa.gov/fish/wild_salmon_monitor/), and the estimates will also be available through StreamNet (http://www.streamnet.org/). |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
Contacts
| Contact | Organization | |
|---|---|---|
| Form submitter | ||
| Greg Volkhardt | Washington Dept Fish and Wildlife | volkhgcv@dfw.wa.gov |
| All assigned contacts | ||
| Greg Volkhardt | Washington Dept Fish and Wildlife | volkhgcv@dfw.wa.gov |
| Greg Volkhardt | Washington Dept Fish and Wildlife | volkhgcv@dfw.wa.gov |
Section 2. Locations
Province / subbasin: Mainstem/Systemwide / Systemwide
| Latitude | Longitude | Waterbody | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
Section 3. Focal species
primary: All Anadromous SalmonidsSection 4. Past accomplishments
| Year | Accomplishments |
|---|
Section 5. Relationships to other projects
| Funding source | Related ID | Related title | Relationship |
|---|---|---|---|
| BPA | 200003900 | Walla Walla River Basin Monito | Project monitors Walla Walla and Touchet summer steelhead population abundances, which will be included in the Salmonid Abundance and Productivity Monitoring Framework metrics. |
| BPA | 200105300 | Reintro of Chum In Duncan Cr | Project monitors juvenile and adult abundance of Lower Gorge chum, which will be included in the Salmonid Abundance and Productivity Monitoring Framework metrics. |
| BPA | 200303900 | Monitor Repro In Wenat/Tuc/Kal | Project monitors the abundance of Wenatchee spring chinook, which will be included in the Salmonid Abundance and Productivity Monitoring Framework metrics. |
| BPA | 200205300 | Assess Salmonids Asotin Cr Ws | Project monitors juvenile and adult primary populations of Asotin Creek chinook and steelhead, which will be included in the Salmonid Abundance Monitoring Framework metrics. |
Section 6. Biological objectives
| Biological objectives | Full description | Associated subbasin plan | Strategy |
|---|---|---|---|
| Measure Adult Abundance (Escapement) | Monitor adult abundance (escapement) for at least one primary population for each listed species in each MPG in each ESU where juvenile abundance monitoring is also conducted. Compare escapement estimates to escapement goals. | None | Governor's Forum Recommendations for Implementing Monitoring of Salmon Recovery |
| Measure Freshwater Productivity | Estimate productivity expressed as downstream migrants per spawner for at least one primary population for each listed species in each MPG in each ESU where juvenile and adult abundance monitoring are also conducted. Compare productivity to Preferred Recovery Scenarios or other values representing recovery. | None | Governor's Forum Recommendations for Implementing Monitoring of Salmon Recovery |
| Measure Juvenile Abundance | Monitor downstream migrant (smolt) abundance for at least one primary population for each listed species in each MPG in each ESU. Compare abundance to Preferred Recovery Scenarios or other values prepresenting recovery. | None | Governor's Forum Recommendations for Implementing Monitoring of Salmon Recovery |
| Populate Monitoring Framework | Identify all primary populations for listed species in each MPG in each ESU and evaluate their feasibility as populations where the other three biological objectives can be met. Select candidate populations for monitoring. | None | Governor's Forum Recommendations for Implementing Monitoring of Salmon Recovery |
Section 7. Work elements (coming back to this)
| Work element name | Work element title | Description | Start date | End date | Est budget |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Produce Plan | Development of Salmonid Abundance and Productivity Monitoring Framework | Refine the concept for a statewide plan to monitor and evaluate VSP criteria for listed salmonids as described in the Governor's Forum Recommendations for Implementing Monitoring aof Salmon Recovery. Integrate the statewide plan with regional recovery plans. | 10/1/2006 | 3/31/2007 | $29,000 |
|
Biological objectives Populate Monitoring Framework |
Metrics |
||||
| Analyze/Interpret Data | Analysis of field data and development of smolt production estimates | Analyzes field data to estimate downstream migrant production for listed Grande Ronde spring chinook and summer steelhead. By the third year of monitoring, we expect to begin drawning conclusions about production relative to escapement and environmental conditions. Coordinate collection of downstream migrant production and precision estimates for populations in the Framework. | 6/30/2007 | 9/30/2009 | $45,000 |
|
Biological objectives Measure Juvenile Abundance |
Metrics Focal Area: Tributaries Primary R, M, and E Type: Status and Trend Monitoring |
||||
| Analyze/Interpret Data | Develop annual freshwater productivity estimates | Collect and/or calculate annual freshwater productivity estimates for populations included in the Salmonid Abundance and Productivity Framework. Evaluate annual freshwater productivity estimates with respect to productivity targets developed by TRT's. | 8/30/2007 | 9/30/2009 | $78,000 |
|
Biological objectives Measure Freshwater Productivity |
Metrics Focal Area: Tributaries Primary R, M, and E Type: Status and Trend Monitoring Focal Area: Emerging Issues |
||||
| Analyze/Interpret Data | Estimate Adult Escapement | Analyze spawner survey data and estimate escapement for an ESA listed primary population identified in the Salmonid Abundance and Productivity Monitoring Framework. Coordinate collection of escapement and precision estimates for primary populations in the Framework and compare to escapement goals. | 1/1/2007 | 9/30/2009 | $49,000 |
|
Biological objectives Measure Adult Abundance (Escapement) |
Metrics Focal Area: Tributaries Primary R, M, and E Type: Status and Trend Monitoring |
||||
| Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data | Assist ODFW with smolt trap operations in the Grande Ronde River | Operate one inclined plane trap and one rotary screw trap in conjunction with ODFW to measure juvenile abundance of spring chinook and summer steelhead in the Grande Ronde River. Operating these traps and estimating these abundances will fill smolt monitoring gaps identified through the Salmonid Abundance and Productivity Monitoring Framework. | 2/1/2007 | 6/30/2009 | $143,000 |
|
Biological objectives Measure Juvenile Abundance |
Metrics Primary R, M, and E Type: status and trend monitoring Focal Area: Tributaries |
||||
| Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data | Collect escapement information for currently unmonitored listed populations | Conduct spawner surveys to estimate escapement for one to three yet-to-be-identified listed Columbia River Basin populations identified in the Statewide Juvenile and Adult Abundance and Productivity Monitoring Framework. The number of populations monitored will depend on manpower efficiencies and measurement techniques that will be identified when monitoring needs are assessed through the framework. | 10/1/2006 | 9/30/2009 | $149,000 |
|
Biological objectives Measure Adult Abundance (Escapement) |
Metrics Focal Area: Tributaries Primary R, M, and E Type: Status and Trend Monitoring |
||||
| Install Fish Monitoring Equipment | Fabricate rotary screw trap | Fabricate a pontoon barges and assemble a rotary screw trap to measure juvenile abundance of Grande Ronde spring chinook and summer steelhead. Purchase two travel trailers for remote site work stations. | 10/1/2006 | 3/1/2007 | $0 |
|
Biological objectives Measure Juvenile Abundance |
Metrics |
||||
Section 8. Budgets
Itemized estimated budget
| Item | Note | FY07 | FY08 | FY09 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Personnel | FTEs for all activities | $89,000 | $75,000 | $91,000 |
| Fringe Benefits | Benefits for all activities | $32,000 | $30,000 | $31,000 |
| Supplies | Field supplies and equipment | $2,000 | $2,000 | $2,000 |
| Travel | Travel to/from trap sites, survey locations, and supervision/oversight | $7,000 | $7,000 | $7,000 |
| Other | Leases, Services, Rentals | $2,000 | $2,000 | $2,000 |
| Overhead | [blank] | $41,000 | $35,000 | $36,000 |
| Totals | $173,000 | $151,000 | $169,000 | |
Total estimated FY 2007-2009 budgets
| Total itemized budget: | $493,000 |
| Total work element budget: | $493,000 |
Cost sharing
| Funding source/org | Item or service provided | FY 07 est value ($) | FY 08 est value ($) | FY 09 est value ($) | Cash or in-kind? | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dingell-Johnson Wallup Breaux | Project Management and juvenile abundance elements of the framework | $24,994 | $8,666 | $9,021 | In-Kind | Under Development |
| State General Fund | Juvenile and adult monitoring on Cedar Creek | $100,000 | $0 | $0 | Cash | Confirmed |
| WA Dept Fish & Wildlife | Framework development oversight | $10,000 | $0 | $0 | In-Kind | Confirmed |
| WA Salmon Recovery Funding Board | Juvenile and adult monitoring on Germany, Mill, and Abernathy Creeks | $303,000 | $303,000 | $303,000 | Cash | Under Development |
| Totals | $437,994 | $311,666 | $312,021 | |||
Section 9. Project future
|
FY 2010 estimated budget: $158,000 FY 2011 estimated budget: $158,000 |
Comments: Assumes 3% salary increase and 12% medical cost increase per year. |
Future O&M costs: Assumes monitoring of mid/upper Columbia and Snake smolt sites continues and the Lower Columbia smolt and adult monitoring proposals (#200715000, 200727400) are funded. Uncertain about additional adult monitoring costs until the Framework is completed and monitoring gaps/improvements are identified.
Termination date: Unknown
Comments: Termination will depend on when salmon are de-listed by NMFS. Monitoring intensity is likely to decrease with de-listing, but will still be required.
Final deliverables: Annual estimates of escapement, downstream migrant abundance, productivity, and percent of abundance and productivity targets achieved will be developed each year and made available through the Natural Resources Data Portal, the Wild Salmon Production Monitoring web site, and StreamNet.
Section 10. Narrative and other documents
| 200728100 Fix it loop responses.doc | Jul 2006 |
| Final Narrative & Fix it 200728100.pdf | 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 | Basinwide | Do Not Fund |
| NPCC DRAFT FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS (Sep 15, 2006) [full Council recs] | ||||||
| $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | Basinwide | ||
ISRP PRELIMINARY REVIEW (Jun 2, 2006)
Recommendation: Not fundable
NPCC comments: The proposal requires considerably more detail and a better accounting of existing monitoring programs; i.e., what have we learned from monitoring other upper basin stocks that can be applied to this area? The proposal should be more than another plan to do planning. The proposal also seeks funding to develop a plan to monitor yet unnamed primary populations in the Mid or Upper Columbia regions (smolt monitoring for two populations and adult monitoring for one population). The scientific merits of the monitoring project are difficult to evaluate without knowing what the final plan will be. Proposed construction of rotary screw traps is premature. Project personnel costs are high relative to the proposed objective. The technical background provides a discussion of salmonid population monitoring and discusses NOAA Fisheries' viability attributes, but it does not describe the status and trends of mid- and upper Columbia salmon and steelhead populations based on the results of the Pacific Northwest Aquatic Monitoring Partnership (PNAMP) and Collaborative Systemwide Monitoring and Evaluation Partnership (CSMEP) efforts. Overall, the proposal omits many plans and programs to which this project could contribute in a meaningful way. Thus it does not really define the problem that is being addressed. This project is related to six other WDFW proposals for monitoring abundance and productivity, as well as six ongoing projects; however, details of the relationships are not provided. According to proponents, the proposed project will provide an "overarching context for a coordinated approach to salmon recovery monitoring of abundance and productivity in Washington State" for this work. A better approach might have been to submit this overarching proposal along with the six other WDFW projects as a complete package in one proposal. Many of the monitoring design and process questions should be worked out before submitting a proposal. There is a wealth of information to draw on, and it appeared that this proposal would attempt to duplicate work that has already been done in monitoring design, especially if smolt production is the focus of the fieldwork. It was not clear how the fieldwork would be verified for accuracy. For example, the proposal describes an EMAP-like design for spawner surveys, but only 40 sites will be selected (how was this sample size determined?) and there are no procedures described in the proposal to verify precision, accuracy, or give confidence intervals.
ISRP FINAL REVIEW (Aug 31, 2006)
Recommendation: Not fundable
NPCC comments: The proposal and response left too many questions unanswered. The ISRP stands by its preliminary recommendation of "Not fundable." The ISRP's preliminary comments from June 1, 2006 are: The proposal requires considerably more detail and a better accounting of existing monitoring programs; i.e., what have we learned from monitoring other upper basin stocks that can be applied to this area? The proposal should be more than another plan to do planning. The proposal also seeks funding to develop a plan to monitor yet unnamed primary populations in the Mid- or Upper Columbia regions (smolt monitoring for two populations and adult monitoring for one population). The scientific merits of the monitoring project are difficult to evaluate without knowing what the final plan will be. Proposed construction of rotary screw traps is premature. Project personnel costs are high relative to the proposed objective. The technical background provides a discussion of salmonid population monitoring and discusses NOAA Fisheries' viability attributes, but it does not describe the status and trends of mid- and upper Columbia salmon and steelhead populations based on the results of Pacific Northwest Aquatic Monitoring Partnership (PNAMP) and Collaborative Systemwide Monitoring and Evaluation Partnership (CSMEP) efforts. Overall, the proposal omits many plans and programs to which this project could contribute in a meaningful way. Thus it does not really define the problem that is being addressed. This project is related to six other WDFW proposals for monitoring abundance and productivity, as well as six ongoing projects; however, details of the relationships are not provided. According to proponents, the proposed project will provide an "overarching context for a coordinated approach to salmon recovery monitoring of abundance and productivity in Washington State" for this work. A better approach might have been to submit this overarching proposal along with the six other WDFW projects as a complete package in one proposal. Many of the monitoring design and process questions should be have been worked out before submitting a proposal. There is a wealth of information to draw on, and it appeared that this proposal would attempt to duplicate work that has already been done in monitoring design, especially if smolt production is the focus of the fieldwork. It was still not clear how the fieldwork would be verified for accuracy. For example, the proposal describes an EMAP-like design for spawner surveys, but only 40 sites will be selected (how was this sample size determined?) and there are no procedures described in the proposal to verify precision, accuracy, or give confidence intervals.