FY 2002 Columbia Plateau proposal 199000501

Section 1. Administrative

Project location

Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Section 2. Past accomplishments

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget

Outyear objectives-based budget

Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase

Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase

Task-based budget

Outyear objectives-based budget

Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase

Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase

Task-based budget

Outyear objectives-based budget

Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase

Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Task-based budget

Outyear objectives-based budget

Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget

Total estimated budget

Reason for change in estimated budget

Estimated costs for this project changed primarily for four reasons. First, various obligatory and redundant planning, permitting and clearance processes have increased exponentially. Second, funds from the Bureau of Indian Affairs for harvest monitoring (a cost share) are no longer available (0.75 FTE). Third, Managers request an extension of the PIT tagging objective to gain more insight to the outmigration timing, survival and smolt to adult survival rates of naturally produced smolts. Finally, considerable effort and resources are needed in the evaluation of McKay Creek habitat and salmonid populations associated with the restoration of perennial flows in the lower six miles beginning in the fall of 2000. McKay Creek flow management is also important in the maintenance of suitable water temperatures in the Umatilla River below the mouth of McKay Creek during the summer. Approximately 15 miles of river habitat has been enhanced and is now suitable for the rearing of salmonids all year and warrants evaluation.

Reason for change in scope

No change in scope is proposed until 2005 when the genetic characteristics of the endemic steelhead should be re-examined and compared to the findings of Currens and Schreck (1993, 1995). In additions, the progeny mark (developed by a new project proposed this year) should be ready by 2005 to begin examining the reproductive success (in terms of smolts and adult returns) of hatchery reared endemic steelhead spawning in the wild in the Umatilla Basin.

Cost sharing

Reviews and recommendations

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

Comment:

Fundable if adequate responses are given to ISRP concerns. More explanation is required of the methods and results (which need to be presented). The proposal indicates a well coordinated, adaptive, multi-agency approach to monitoring and evaluation of the key response variables required for stock assessment and restoration effectiveness, including regular routine genetics surveys which could complement other research planned or underway to examine wild and hatchery interactions, and good communications through regular reporting, meetings, and workshops, and a web site. Nonetheless, some improvements are suggested. The goals of providing harvest and supplementation for population rebuilding are in conflict - a modeling workshop/review is suggested. The literature review provided here was thorough, publishable, and useful. The rates of residualism that were reported are low in comparison to upriver releases elsewhere, where about half of the male smolts failed to migrate then died over summer after displacing wild steelhead parr from stream habitat. The finding that quality habitat is sufficiently utilized should act as a red light to supplementation plans. It also suggests that managing our way out of the current low ocean survival bottleneck (some reprieve may be currently evident) lies in increasing the productivity and capacity of the freshwater habitat. Further work is suggested to calibrate redd counts with wild and hatchery steelhead abundance. Other measures of adult abundance should be explored (e.g., area under the curve, resistivity counters, adult fences). Wild and hatchery adult abundance likely fluctuate in parallel primarily as a function of ocean conditions. Frequent reference was made to the mortality in the downstream migration, within the Columbia. Information should be presented, including variability. A comparison of the Umatilla, Walla Walla, and John Day data from monitoring and evaluation would prove highly instructive, since they represent, respectively, a system that has been augmented for some time, one where hatchery introductions are planned, and one that has had no hatchery introduction but much habitat improvement work. The proposal should have presented some of the copious amounts of data gathered, including some comparative results from the other watersheds in the Columbia Plateau. A provincial scale analysis of the monitoring and evaluation is required.

There is need for very close coordination and cooperation among the tribal and ODFW projects on the Umatilla River, particularly among three of them, including this one and Project 8902401, Evaluation of Juvenile Salmonid Outmigration and Survival in the Lower Umatilla River, and Project 9000500, Umatilla Hatchery Monitoring and Evaluation.

Comment:

Comment:

Work to meet Objectives 2 and 7 is fundable. Work under Objectives 1, 3, 5, and 6 must show that it is not handicapped by the problem experienced with the Oregon coastal coho salmon monitoring as implemented from the 1950's to the 1990s, which was inadequate and gave inaccurate results. Oregon's protocols were changed to include random selection of sampling sites. If funded, protocols under this project must be consistent with those in the Oregon Plan as being implemented in projects 199801600 and 25088.

Work under Objective 4 needs to use more rigorous and reliable methods than telephone surveys to estimate harvest.

Comment:

Comments
Monitoring and evaluation of several on-going programs important to sub-basin objectives. MULTIPLE refers to MCR SH, MCR SCH, coho-u, fall chn-u, others

Already ESA Req? NO

Biop? NO

Comment:

Comments
Spring chinook and fall chinook marking component required by hatchery BiOp.

Already ESA Req? YES

Biop? NO

Comment:

Comment:

"Fundable In Part" for Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation - Project 199000501

Evaluate natural spawning, rearing, migration, survival, age and growth characteristics and life histories of adult salmon, steelhead, bull trout and mountain whitefish, and their naturally produced progeny in the Umatilla River Basin

Staff recommendation: Though the ISRP was critical of the project and the inadequacies of the response, they also acknowledged the benefits of the project to date. The principle concern by the ISRP was that objectives 1,3,5 and 6 are adequate enough to ensure that results are accurate. Council staff concurs with this recommendations and request Bonneville to ensure the ISRP recommendations are addressed and implemented in contracting

Budget effect on base program (Project 199000501):

Comment:

Comment:

Comment:

Sponsor comments: See comment at Council's website