FY 2002 Blue Mountain proposal 27019

Section 1. General administrative information
Section 2. Past accomplishments
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
Section 4. Budgets for planning/design phase
Section 5. Budgets for construction/implementation phase
Section 6. Budgets for operations/maintenance phase
Section 7. Budgets for monitoring/evaluation phase
Section 8. Budget summary

Reviews and Recommendations

Additional documents

Title	Type
27019 Narrative	Narrative
27019 Sponsor Response to ISRP	Response
27019 Powerpoint Presentation	Powerpoint Presentation

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal title	Adult Salmon Abundance Monitoring
Proposal ID	27019
Organization	Nez Perce Tribe/Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (NPT/PNNL)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
Name	James R. Harbeck
Mailing address	612 SW 2nd Enterprise, OR 97828
Phone / email	5414263198 / jimh@nezperce.org
Manager authorizing this project	Jaime Pinkham
Review cycle	Blue Mountain
Province / Subbasin	Blue Mountain / Grande Ronde
Short description	Implement state-of-the-art technologies to accurately quantify chinook salmon spawner abundance in the Minam River. Adult abundance data would allow a measure of recovery threshold abundance of a listed species (NMFS 2000).
Target species	Spring chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha)

Project location

Latitude	Longitude	Description
45.422	-117.2775	NPT Enterprise Field office
45.5325	-117.735	Minam River

Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Sponsor-reported:

RPA
RM&E RPA Action 182
RM&E RPA Action 183
RM&E RPA Action 193

Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:

Reviewing agency	Action #	BiOp Agency	Description
NMFS	Action 180	NMFS	The Action Agencies and NMFS shall work within regional prioritization and congressional appropriation processes to establish and provide the level of FCRPS funding to develop and implement a basinwide hierarchical monitoring program. This program shall be developed collaboratively with appropriate regional agencies and shall determine population and environmental status (including assessment of performance measures and standards) and allow ground-truthing of regional databases. A draft program including protocols for specific data to be collected, frequency of samples, and sampling sites shall be developed by September 2001. Implementation should begin no later than the spring of 2002 and will be fully implemented no later than 2003.

Section 2. Past accomplishments

Year	Accomplishment
	New Project

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Project ID	Title	Description
19202604	Life History of Spring Chinook Salmon and Steelhead (ODFW)	Links adult abundance with juvenile emigrant abundance in the Minam River
198805301	Northeast Oregon Hatcheries	Will be integrated with the activities of project 198805301
198712700	Grande Ronde Smolt Monitoring	Links adult abundance with juvenile emigrant abundance in the Minam River
19970300	Chinook Salmon Abundance Monitoring	Determines adult abundance for another ESU

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2002 cost
1. Coordinate the Adult Salmon Abundance Monitoring Project with appropriate Tribal, state and federal management agencies and independent scientists in the Snake River basin.	Meet with Tribal, state, and federal agencies and independent scientists from Battelle Northwest Laboratory to discuss abundance monitoring of adult chinook salmon in the Minam River as related to ESA recovery planning, and standardized M&E	ongoing	$4,000
	b. Coordinate environmental analysis through National Environmental Policy Act with appropriate management and funding agencies prior to commencement of the field season.	1	$4,000
	c. Prepare the required Endangered Species Act permit applications necessary to implement the project.	1	$5,000
	d. Prepare a Memorandum Of Agreement with the Boise-Cascade prior to implementing the project.	1	$1,000
	e. Provide annual ESA reports for NMFS which summarizes project activities by the date required by the BPA Contract	ongoing	$4,000

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost
1. Coordinate the Adult Salmon Abundance Monitoring Project with appropriate Tribal, state and federal management agencies and independent scientists in the Snake River basin.	2003	2006	$34

Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase

FY 2003	FY 2004	FY 2005	FY 2006
$8,235	$8,487	$8,742	$9,004

Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2002 cost	Subcontractor
2. Develop engineering design for the selected technology for measuring chinook salmon spawner abundance in the Minam River.	a. Identify all potential physical sites in the Minam River that meet establish criteria. Accomplish prior to proposal presentation	1	$4,000
	b. Select the stream site and preferred technology to achieve accurate adult abundance information. Make selection prior to proposal	1	$4,000
	c In collaboration with co-managers and Battelle Northwest Laboratory , facilitate the final design of the selected technologies suitable for use in the Minam River.	1	$5,000	Yes
	d Construct the identified technologies that will be used to quantify adult salmon abundance in the Minam River.	1	$388,831	Yes

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost
2. Develop engineering design for the selected technology for measuring chinook salmon spawner abundance in the Minam River.	2003	2004	$786,858

Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase

FY 2003	FY 2004
$447,673	$339,185

Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2002 cost	Subcontractor

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost

Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase

Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2002 cost
3. Implement the selected technologies to determine salmon spawner abundance in the Minam River on an annual basis	a. Develop protocol and monitoring and evaluation plans for the adult abundance monitoring facility.	on-going	$5,000
	b. Install the selected adult abundance monitoring system in the Minam River.	on-going	$10,000
	c. Operate and maintain the abundance monitoring structure on a daily basis to ensure safe operation at the facility.	on-going	$20,000
	d. Install constant recording thermographs and document hourly water temperature at the facility sites.	on-going	$3,000
	e. Install a staff gauge and collect stream discharge information from the USGS site located on the Minam River.	on-going	$3,000
	f. Quantify daily and total salmon spawner abundance at all sites on an annual basis.	on-going	$6,351
	g. Determine the migration timing of the spawning population into the Minam River. Correlate migration timing with water temperature and stream discharge.	on-going	$6,000
	h. Participate in annual spawning ground surveys with ODFW in the Minam River.	on-going	$10,000
	i. Compare salmon abundance with redd counts. Calculate fish per redd numbers based on redd counts and monitoring numbers. Compare age structure, sex composition and brood year composition with carcass collections from spawning ground surveys.	on-going	$10,000
	j. Remove the abundance monitoring temporary structures after the adult spawner migration is completed.	on-going	$5,000
4.Technology Transfer	a. Share data with region-wide data bases such as Streamnet, with co-management agencies and independent scientists.	on-going	$8,000
	b Compile, analyze and present data cooperatively with co-managers summarizing monitoring activities and results in the Minam River and compare to similar work proceeding in the Columbia River Basin. Provide quarterly and annual reports	on-going	$15,000
	c. Present reports on project activities and findings at Annual BPA/CBFWA Project Review and other forums (i.e., AFS, NAFWS, LSRCP Annual Review).	on-going	$10,000

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost
3. Implement the selected technologies to determine salmon spawner abundance in the Minam River on an annual basis	2003	2006	$461,077
4.Technology Transfer	2003	2006	$142,201

Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

FY 2003	FY 2004	FY 2005	FY 2006
$174,116	$179,335	$184,714	$190,256

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget

Item	Note	FY 2002 cost
Personnel	FTE: 2.4	$93,206
Fringe	35%/25%	$32,622
Supplies		$20,000
Travel		$5,000
Indirect	20.9%	$31,523
NEPA		$10,000
PIT tags	# of tags: 0	$0
Subcontractor	Battelle-Pacific Northwest National Laboratory	$338,831
		$531,182

Total estimated budget

Total FY 2002 cost	$531,182
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds	$0
Total FY 2002 budget request	$531,182
FY 2002 forecast from 2001	$0
% change from forecast	0.0%

Reason for change in estimated budget

N/A

Reason for change in scope

N/A

Cost sharing

Organization	Item or service provided	Amount	Cash or in-kind

Other budget explanation

After the 3rd year (2004), out year budgets are drastically reduced because of the absence of construction and design costs.

Reviews and recommendations

This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.

REVIEW:
ISRP Preliminary Review (ISRP 2001-9)

Recommendation:
Fundable only if response is adequate

Date:
Sep 28, 2001

Comment:

A response is needed. This is a strong and innovative proposal that would establish quantitative annual monitoring of the spring chinook escapement to the Minam River. The Minam River spring chinook population is the only Grande Ronde Subbasin stock listed as an index population in the recent NMFS Biological Opinion. The proposal provides good background and technical justifications but there are several questions that the ISRP recommends a response:

Although the Minam River has been identified as an index site, the proposal provides no background on the trends in chinook in the Minam or the data available on this population. Are you confident that the numbers warrant this major investment? Further, at the briefings, it was revealed that splash dam logging had occurred on the Minam, which generates the question whether the stock and habitat in the Minam is truly representative of other spring chinook populations?
(a) What is the advantage of the 4 independent systems. Is the benefit of the third or fourth system worth the incremental cost and complexity? On what basis was this design recommended? (b) What validation procedure would be implemented for both the number of chinook estimated and the species composition of the fish counted? (c) It is not evident in the proposal that the NPT has the technical/hydroacoustic expertise in their staff. These instruments require constant attention and refinement. Does the NPT anticipate recruiting these staff or are they included in this proposal?
The table on page 5, Section 9 provides a nice summary of methods but generates the question about what determined the recommendation to use hydroacoustics. For example, the resistivity systems would be less difficult to use but maybe limited by the anticipated flow regimes. Further justification for the recommended system is desirable.
To apply the information on spawning escapements, the NPT will also need biological data on the returning adults. What program will provide that or should that information be included in this proposal to ensure it is collected?

A final comment is that several organizations along the coast have implemented similar hydroacoustic systems, although experience in river systems is more limited than in lakes, etc. The NPT may consider forming (or contracting) a technical advisory group to assist in software expertise, site preparation, etc. The investment in this new program could be very worthwhile but the quality of the resulting data will be highly dependent on the site selected and the environmental conditions expected.

Confusion is evident in the outline of objectives and tasks as represented in the proposal's budget sections. In Section 5, Budget for Construction/Implementation, Objective 2 and its Tasks a, b, and c are planning/design matters and belong in Sect. 4. An Objective 3,"Construct the apparatus" should be created in Section 5, and the former Task 2d should remain with it and be renumbered. Also, the out-year items in Section 7, Budget for M&E, should probably be moved to Section 6, as these are really operations. We realize that the whole project is in effect monitoring project, but in such a case, monitoring should be regarded as the operation, and only activities that evaluate the effectiveness of the monitoring operation should be classed as M&E.

Council should simultaneously consider this proposal with the companion work proposed in the Salmon River subbasin, proposal 199703000. The response should address concerns from that proposal that apply here as well.

REVIEW:
CBFWA Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
High Priority

Date:
Nov 30, 2001

Comment:

The sponsors suggest estimation of spawning escapement based on redd counts are biased and provide imprecise approximations of true escapement (abundance). The sponsors indicated that the hypothesis is based on PATH and other literature that have reviewed the limitations of redd count accuracy and redd count expansion methods to estimate abundance. The inaccuracy in an abundance estimate is also reflected in other parameters (growth rate, smolt to adult ratios, recruits per spawner, adult to adult returns, etc). The NMFS (2000) Biological Opinion, Viable Salmonid Population paper and other conservation literature call for performance standards at the population level to be evaluated in terms of abundance and call for more accurate counts of adult abundance. The current project is designed to provide adult salmon abundance information. There is some question if the Minam is the correct stream to implement this project at this time. There is also concern about whether hydroacoustics has been proven effective for monitoring adult salmon in streams. This project addresses RPA 180. The reviewers agree that developing a non-invasive, passive monitoring technique for monitoring adult salmon escapements is a high priority. There is disagreement regarding whether this project should be implemented in the Minam, or whether hydroacoustics has been proven to a point of implementation in the Columbia River Basin. There is also concern about the impacts of the fish counting station on adult migrations.

REVIEW:
ISRP Final Review (ISRP 2001-12A)

Recommendation:
Fund

Date:
Dec 21, 2001

Comment:

See comments under 199703000. The ISRP recommendation of fundable in part on this set of proposals refers to the ISRP recommendation that the NPT select one representative site (either Johnson Creek or the Minam River) and conduct a 3-year pilot study. Thorough responses were provided to each question. The ISRP continues to have a couple of concerns that the proponent should address in their work: comment 2b verification; and a longer-term budget concern. Verification reliant upon video is not likely to be successful, particularly given the flow conditions expected and used to support the hydroacoustics methodology. An alternative plan for verification should be considered. The budget issue concerns the longer-term use of contracting to PNNL at the projected level of cost. If technical expertise is developed within NPT, then purchase of the equipment maybe a more efficient means to implement such programs.

REVIEW:
NMFS Review

Recommendation:

Date:
Feb 1, 2002

Comment:

Statement of Potential Biological Benefit to ESU
Benefits are indirect. Development and implementation of hydroacoustic detection methods will allow more accurate abundance estimates for Minam River population. Accurate abundance estimates aid in status assessment, recovery planning.

Comments
Project may also relate to action #193 (develop novel tagging and detection techniques); however Action 193 is aimed primarily at stock identification (in ocean, hatchery vs. wild, etc.). Continuity with previous monitoring methods will be important.

Already ESA Req? No

Biop? Yes

REVIEW:
BPA Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
D

Date:
Feb 11, 2002

Comment:

Do not recommend. This project is related to 199703000, 27021, and 28052. Recommend limited funding of 27021 to test new technologies and do not recommend funding new technologies employed in 199703000 or 28052.

BPA RPA RPM:
--

NMFS RPA/USFWS RPM:
180

REVIEW:
NWPPC Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
Do Not Fund

Date:
Apr 19, 2002

Comment: