FY 2003 Middle Snake proposal 199800200
Contents
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 |
|---|---|
| 199800200 Narrative | Narrative |
| 199800200 Sponsor Response to the ISRP | Response |
| 199800200 Powerpoint Presentation | Powerpoint Presentation |
| 199800200 Powerpoint Presentation: 2003 Update | Powerpoint Presentation |
| Middle Snake: Snake Upper Middle Subbasin Map with BPA Fish & Wildlife Projects | Subbasin Map |
| Middle Snake: Snake Upper Middle Subbasin Map with BPA Fish & Wildlife Projects | Subbasin Map |
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Snake River Native Salmonid Assessment |
| Proposal ID | 199800200 |
| Organization | Idaho Department of Fish and Game, and the Idaho Office of Species Conservation (IDFG/IOSC) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
| Name | Kevin Meyer |
| Mailing address | 1414 E. Locust Lane Nampa, ID 83686 |
| Phone / email | 2084658404 / kmeyer@idfg.state.id.us |
| Manager authorizing this project | Steve Yundt |
| Review cycle | Middle Snake |
| Province / Subbasin | Middle Snake / Snake Lower Middle |
| Short description | Investigate population status and trends, life histories, habitat needs, limiting factors, and threats to persistence of native salmonids in the Snake River and tributaries upstream of Hell's Canyon Dam in Idaho, and implement recovery/protection plans. |
| Target species | Bull trout, redband trout, Yellowstone cutthroat trout, whitefish |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 42.92 | -115.61 | entire middle Snake River province |
| entire upper Snake River province |
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Sponsor-reported:
| RPA |
|---|
| 9.6.5.3 |
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
| Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
|---|
Section 2. Past accomplishments
| Year | Accomplishment |
|---|---|
| 1998 | Conducted bull trout redd counts in selected portions of Boise River drainage to identify critical spawning habitat and establish baselines for future monitoring. Redd counts were ineffective in Boise drainage to estimate bull trout populations. |
| 1998 | Surveyed fish and habitat at 62 sites in the NF Payette and Weiser river basins. |
| 1998-2000 | Assessed effectiveness of 3 yrs of brook trout (bkt) removal for bull trout conservation in small stream. After 3 yr recovery period, a final sample of bkt will be collected in FY2003 to assess removal's impact on bkt survival, fecundity, maturity, etc. |
| 1999 | Surveyed fish and habitat at 216 sites in Owyhee, SF Boise, Weiser, and NF Payette river basins. |
| 2000 | Surveyed fish and habitat at 277 sites in Portneuf, Teton, Blackfoot, and SF Snake river basins. |
| 2001 | Surveyed fish and habitat at 316 sites in Raft, Goose, Bannock, Rock, Willow, and SF Snake basins. |
| 1999-2001 | Collected 3,548 fin clips at 153 sites from redband trout in western Idaho and Yellowstone cutthroat trout in eastern Idaho, to determine genetic purity of populations. To date, samples from 40 sites have been analyzed. |
| 2001 | Completed construction of database to maintain project data. Data has been entered through 2001 field season and has been made available to IDFG regional staff and other federal and state agencies and local partners. |
| 1999-2000 | Studied Yellowstone cutthroat trout abundance and size structure at 77 sites from the 1980s that could be relocated in 1999 and 2000 to assess whether abundance or size structure had changed. Manuscript from study was accepted by peer-reviewed journal. |
| 2000 | Studied factors that influence Yellowstone cutthroat trout age at maturity. Results will be used to calculate effective population size for cutthroat trout in eastern Idaho for extinction risk analysis. Study being submitted to peer-reviewed journal. |
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
| Project ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| BOR Boise River bull trout population monitoring. | Provided screw trap for collecting data; helped select trap location and with installation. | |
| BPA proposal by IDFG for genetic testing of native salmonids. | Would be used to analyze genetic samples collected on our project to determine genetic purity and variability of native salmonids in Upper Snake River Basin.. | |
| BPA proposal by IDFG for fish restoration on the Gold Fork River in the NF Payette River subbasin. | Would attempt to bull trout populations throughout the drainage and reconnect river corridor blocked by irrigation diversions, both of which would directly relate to the goals of our project. | |
| BPA proposals (three) by NRCS to improve riparian and upland habitat conditions in several watersheds in southern Idaho. | All proposals propose to restore habitat for native salmonids, and thus would compliment our efforts. | |
| IDFG redband trout studies in southwest Idaho | They are following same inventorying sampling protocol, and with additional studies being planned, results will be used to begin assessing limiting factors for these populations. |
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2003 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase
Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2003 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Coordinate with other ongoing projects and other entities on all existing data in the middle and upper Snake River provinces and on project-sponsored data collection. | a. Coordinate with other entities to determine where data is lacking, to avoid duplicating effort, to assist in prioritizing field work, and to gain an historical perspective on the salmonid populations in the Upper Snake River Basin relative to today. | ongoing | $6,928 | |
| 1. | b. Share data collected on Snake River Native Salmonid Assessment project with all interested parties in electronic or raw formet, and with annual reports. | ongoing | $1,732 | |
| 1. | c. Assist USBOR and USFS in conducting studies to identify life history characteristics of juvenile bull trout in the Boise River basin. | 1 | $0 | |
| 2. Assess the current stock status, life hitory traits, and potential limiting factors and threats to persistence of native salmonid populations in the Snake River Basin upstream from Hell's Canyon Dam. | a. In FY2003, survey presence/absence and abundance of native redband trout in 26 streams (78 sites) in the Big Wood River drainage, 31 streams (93 sites) in the Salmon Falls Creek drainage, … | 3 | $101,752 | |
| 2. | b. Identify, describe, and measure habitat characteristics at the sites surveyed in Task 2a, and analyze their influence on native salmonid distribution and abundance… | 3 | $37,251 | |
| 2. | c. Coordinate the collection of water temperature data to avoid duplication on our project (80 sites with temperature loggers per year) and with efforts by other agencies and entities in the drainages mentioned in Task 2a in FY2003. | ongoing | $2,620 | |
| 2. | d. Based on results of tasks 2a - 2c, identify populations at risk and begin investigation of limiting factors for redband trout. | ongoing | $52,544 | |
| 3. Compile stock status and habitat survey information into the Snake River Native Salmonid Assessment Database. | a. Enter data collected from tasks 2a and 2b, as well as other existing data from other agencies, etc., into database. | 3 | $41,565 | |
| 3. | b. Use GIS analysis of current native salmonid distribution and abundance to determine current status and trends. In conjunction with this analysis and Task 2b, identify populations at risk and in need of recovery strategies. | ongoing | $10,391 | |
| 4. Determine the degree of genetic purity, diversity, and variability among and within populations of native salmonids in the middle and upper Snake River provinces. | a. Collect and preserve samples (fin sections) from suspected native salmonid populations sampled in Task 2a for mitochondrial and nuclear DNA testing. | 3 | $0 | |
| 4. | b. Send samples to lab for analysis. Use results to assess the purity of populations and the degree and genetic diversity and variability among and within populations of native salmonids. | 6 | $76,004 | Yes |
| 5. Assess the effectiveness of three years of intensive electrofishing removal efforts to eliminate brook trout from a small stream containing bull trout (BUT). If effective, assess whether BUT numbers can recover to 15 fish/km (Rieman and McIntyre 1995) | a. Use removal-depletion electrofishing in Pike's Fork of the Crooked River to estimate abundance and to collect brook trout from the 9.4 km section of stream above a man-made barrier. | 1 | $6,928 | |
| 5. | b. Calculate population densities for age-0 and age-1+ brook trout and bull trout, and removal efficiencies for brook trout. Compare brook trout population densities from previous years to assess overall removal efficiencies. | 1 | $1,732 | |
| 5. | c. Use otoliths from retained brook trout to determine age structure. | 1 | $3,464 | |
| 5. | d. Calculate mean total annual mortality rate, growth, age at sexual maturity, fecundity, and sex ratio. Compare estimates to previous years to assess whether brook trout compensation occurred. | 1 | $3,464 |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Coordinate with other ongoing projects and other entities on all existing data in middle and upper Snake River provinces and on project-sponsored data collection. | 2004 | 2007 | $38,000 |
| 2. Finish assessing current stock status, and begin focusing on determining the major limiting factors and threats to persistence of native salmonid populations in the Snake River Basin upstream from Hell's Canyon Dam. | 2004 | 2007 | $1,002,000 |
| 3. Compile stock status and habitat survey information into the Snake River Native Salmonid Assessment Database. | 2004 | 2007 | $153,000 |
| 4. Determine degree of genetic purity, diversity, and variability among and within populations of native salmonids in the middle and upper Snake River provinces. | 2004 | 2007 | $337,000 |
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase
| FY 2004 | FY 2005 | FY 2006 | FY 2007 |
|---|---|---|---|
| $360,000 | $375,000 | $390,000 | $406,000 |
Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2003 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 2003 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
Section 8. Estimated budget summary
Itemized budget
| Item | Note | FY 2003 cost |
|---|---|---|
| Personnel | FTE: One full-time biologist, one full-time technician, and 5 seasonals | $162,656 |
| Fringe | $49,784 | |
| Supplies | Equipment repair, film and development, gear replacement and supplies for field, software updates | $19,963 |
| Travel | Food, gas, and lodging, camp groceries, etc. | $23,418 |
| Subcontractor | Genetics processing and analysis for 50 sites | $72,540 |
| Other | Capital Outlay: Compound Microscope, Water analyzer, Satellite telephone for remote contact, etc. | $18,014 |
| $346,375 | ||
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2003 cost | $346,375 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2003 budget request | $346,375 |
| FY 2003 forecast from 2002 | $290,000 |
| % change from forecast | 19.4% |
Reason for change in estimated budget
Genetic sampling to date is not progressing at a rate that will allow us to adequately assess genetic purity, diversity, and variability within and among populations of native salmonids in the middle and upper Snake River provinces. Without the increase, this objective will not be fully achieved until much later in the project. If IDFG genetics proposal to BPA in Upper Snake River Province is approved, this increase will not be required or requested.
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Fundable only if response is adequate
Mar 1, 2002
Comment:
A response is needed. This is an excellent proposal in virtually all respects. It is well written; provides excellent and compelling links to the FWP, including an emphasis on assessing and restoring native fish populations in native habitats; and substantial review of results to-date. The section on presentation of results for ongoing projects is truly exemplary and could serve as a useful model for other ongoing proposals. The track record for a project that is only three years old is impressive and has resulted in numerous reports and publications even at this early stage of the project.While this is an excellent proposal with demonstrated results, the ISRP would like to see assurances that data generated from it will be compatible with other efforts in the region. Aquatic habitat data collection procedures should be consistent with recommendations in Johnson et al. (2001; Johnson, D. H., N. Pittman, E. Wilder, J. A. Silver, R. W. Plotnikoff, B. C. Mason, K. K. Jones, P. Roger, T. A. O'Neil, C. Barrett. 2001. Inventory and Monitoring of Salmon Habitat in the Pacific Northwest - Directory and Synthesis of Protocols for Management/Research and Volunteers in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, and British Columbia. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, Washington. 211pp.).
Finally, the last phrase of the short description under Section 1, says to "implement protection/recovery plans". Objectives 1-4 (Section 5, and Section 9f, pp. 14-21) provide a logical sequence of data collection and analysis that unfortunately stops short of identifying specific criteria and steps that will be used to designate conservation management units, something that seems necessary to do before it would be possible to implement protection or recovery plans. In conjunction with Proposal #33001, project sponsors should describe how the anticipated data (genetic, abundance, life history, and habitat) will be used to identify conservation management units and provide some idea of how these units could be linked together into a protection and recovery plan for Yellowstone cutthroat trout or redband trout in the upper Snake River system. Would the data be used to identify core or source populations from which recovery actions could be expanded or would sets of populations be protected in refuge-type units such as subbasin level watersheds that might be managed under special or restrictive regulations?
Reviewers were impressed with the scientific and technical rigor (and performance) of this project, but need to see how the thorough data collection efforts will link strongly back to native fish management issues of concern to the region generally and the FWP specifically.
Comment:
Comment:
Fundable, with high benefits to fish. This is an excellent proposal and response in virtually all respects. The proposal is well written; provides excellent and compelling links to the FWP, including an emphasis on assessing and restoring native fish populations in native habitats; and substantial review of results to-date. The section on presentation of results for ongoing projects is truly exemplary and could serve as a useful model for other ongoing proposals. The track record for a project that is only three years old is impressive and has resulted in numerous reports and publications even at this early stage of the project. The response addresses the ISRP concerns in a thoughtful and thorough manner. The response details how Conservation Management Units may be identified and provides examples of how differing genetic results would lead to different management units and actions.Comment:
Do not recommend. May not be an FCRPS responsibility to mitigate above Hells Canyon dam if not affected by the construction or operation of Black Canyon, Anderson Ranch, Boise Diversion, Minidoka, or Palisades reservoirs. Although there have been prior bull trout assessments in this basin, BPA is reassessing its obligation to mitigation for bull trout above areas blocked by non-Federal dams.Comment:
Project Issue 6: Idaho Department of Fish and Game project 199800200 Snake River Native Salmonid Assessment
The ISRP provided a "Fundable" recommendation stating that the project would have high benefits to fish. In addition they stated that it was an exceptional proposal in virtually all respects, and was well written and provided excellent and compelling links to the Program.
Bonneville rated the project a "B" and comment on not funding the project since it may not be linked to the FCSPS. The sponsor points to the operation of Black Canyon, Anderson Ranch and Boise Diversion resident fish.
Council Recommendation: The original FY 2003 budget requested was $346,375, which included genetics work identified in Objective 4, task b. In an effort to reach a balanced budget for the province the sponsors realigned and prioritized elements of this project and choose to reduce the budget. This realignment would result in a total project budget in FY 2003 at $311,375, FY 2004 at $320,302 and FY 2005 at $320,806. The Council recommends funding the project at these levels.
Comment:
Fund as recommendedComment:
On track. 04 & 05 costs ok.Comment:
NW Power and Conservation Council's FY 2006 Project Funding Review
expense
May 2005
| FY05 NPCC start of year: | FY06 NPCC staff preliminary: | FY06 NPCC July draft start of year: |
| $320,806 | $320,806 | $320,806 |
Sponsor comments: See comment at Council's website