Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Distribution and life history characteristics of lampreys in tributaries of the lower Columbia River Basin |
| Proposal ID | 31003 |
| Organization | U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator |
| Name | Travis Coley |
| Mailing address | 9317 NE HWY 99 Suite I Vancouver, WA 98665 |
| Phone / email | 3606967605 / travis_coley@fws.gov |
| Manager authorizing this project | Howard Schaller |
| Review cycle | Lower Columbia |
| Province / Subbasin | Lower Columbia / Columbia Lower |
| Short description | With emphasis on Pacific lampreys, identify tributaries containing lamprey, and quantitatively evaluate populations and their habitats in two streams below Bonneville Dam |
| Target species | Pacific lamprey, western brook lamprey, and river lamprey |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|
|
|
Various tributaries below Bonneville Dam |
| 45.67 |
-122.57 |
Columbia lower subbasin |
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
| Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
|---|
Section 2. Past accomplishments
| Year | Accomplishment |
|---|
| 2000 |
Trapped and tagged adult anadromous lampreys throughout the year |
| 2000 |
Evaluated larval lamprey distribution, habitat use, and biological characteristics |
| 2000 |
Trapped and tagged outmigrant juvenile lampreys throughout the year |
| 2000 |
Evaluated spawning habitat requirements of adult lampreys |
| 2001 |
Trapped and tagged adult anadromous lampreys throughout the year |
| 2001 |
Evaluated larval lamprey distribution, habitat use, and biological characteristics |
| 2001 |
Trapped and tagged outmigrant juvenile lampreys throughout the year |
| 2001 |
Evaluated spawning habitat requirements of adult lampreys |
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
| Project ID | Title | Description |
|---|
| 200001400 |
Evaluate habitat use and population dynamics of lampreys in Cedar Creek |
similar methods for comparison purposes |
| 9402600 |
Pacific lamprey research and restoration projects |
similar methods for comparison purposes between tributaries upstream and downstream of Bonneville Dam |
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 |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase
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 |
|---|
| 1. Identify and survey additional streams in the lower Columbia River basin that may be suitable study sites to complement ongoing work in Cedar Creek |
a. Confer with various agencies to obtain information on lamprey presence |
1 |
$13,825 |
|
|
b. Conduct electrofishing and habitat field surveys of streams identified as potentially suitable for study sites |
|
$159,456 |
|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
| 1. Estimate distrubution, abundance, biological characteristics, and habiat associations of lamprey larvae in two streams selected for further study |
2004 |
2007 |
$290,585 |
| 2. Investigate feasibility of estimating timing and abundance of emigrating juvenile lamprey |
2004 |
2007 |
$799,108 |
| 3. Investigate feasibility of estimating timing, abundance, and biological characteristics of immigrating adult lamprey |
2004 |
2007 |
$145,292 |
| 4. Evaluate spawning habitat requirements of adult lamprey |
2004 |
2007 |
$217,939 |
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
| FY 2004 | FY 2005 | FY 2006 | FY 2007 |
|---|
| $337,096 | $353,950 | $371,648 | $390,230 |
Section 8. Estimated budget summary
Itemized budget
| Item | Note | FY 2003 cost |
|---|
| Personnel |
FTE: 1 GS12 Biologist (75%), 2 GS 5 Biologists |
$94,850 |
| Fringe |
|
$28,455 |
| Supplies |
|
$10,542 |
| Travel |
|
$5,000 |
| Indirect |
|
$34,434 |
| Capital |
|
$0 |
| NEPA |
|
$0 |
| PIT tags |
|
$0 |
| Subcontractor |
|
$0 |
| Other |
|
$0 |
| $173,281 |
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2003 cost | $173,281 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2003 budget request | $173,281 |
| FY 2003 forecast from 2002 | $0 |
| % change from forecast | 0.0% |
Reason for change in estimated budget
n/a
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|
| USFWS |
field gear (backpack electrofisher, etc.) |
$5,000 |
in-kind |
| USGS-BRD-CRRL |
assistance in species identification |
$13,000 |
in-kind |
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Recommendation:
Fundable only if response is adequate
Date:
Mar 1, 2002
Comment:
A response is needed. During the first year the sponsors propose to survey five streams and select two streams for study whose habitats vary from each other and from another stream, Cedar Creek, where lamprey studies are ongoing. The assertion is that the proposed work together with the Cedar Creek study will provide information on lamprey populations across a range of habitat conditions and stream sizes that could then be compared to lamprey populations upstream of mainstem hydropower facilities. The sponsors need to justify why the lower Columbia populations could serve as references for populations hundreds of miles upstream in a completely different ecoregion, and why it is necessary to intensively study streams of different sizes? The ISRP wonders if a larger scale, less intensive survey of lamprey population distribution and abundance and habitat conditions across a broader range of Lower Columbia River tributaries could be more beneficial at this time. The knowledge gained from the ongoing Cedar Creek study and lamprey work done on the Oregon Coast could aid in designing such a study. We ask the sponsors to address why they feel that intensive studies on two additional streams would provide greater benefit than a larger scale survey to assess population and habitat status across Lower Columbia streams. Do the five streams that will be surveyed during the first year represent the geographic extent of lamprey distribution in the Lower Columbia? Are they representative of lamprey streams in the region? If so, why?
A summary of results from the Cedar Creek study would provide useful context. The methods for selecting sampling sites and sample reaches during the survey phase need to be more thoroughly discussed. Most of the habitat work appears to be at the microhabitat scale. Is there going to be any watershed scale, valley segment scale, or reach scale habitat assessment? How will abundance estimates be related to habitat characteristics? The discussion of "statolith and genetic analyses" needs to be expanded. Why are the sponsors doing these analyses and how will they be done? The sponsors appear to be requesting nearly $800K to "investigate the feasibility" of estimating migration timing and abundance of outmigrating juveniles and returning adults. Although this work would be useful, the cost needs to be justified. Are there no known or accepted methods for making these estimates? Tasks 3.2 and 3.3 need to be much more thoroughly discussed. The sponsors propose to study relationships between Pacific lamprey and sympatric species of lamprey but no design or methods for doing this are given.
Recommendation:
Recommended Action
Date:
May 17, 2002
Comment:
Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Jun 7, 2002
Comment:
Fundable at low priority. The proposal doesn't provide a compelling argument for the need for this research; it doesn't indicate how this research would provide additional understanding or value over the work at Cedar Creek. In the response the investigators took notice of ISRP's concern about the generality of surveys versus a few site specific studies but still intended to focus only on a couple of sites after the first year; rather than to use random sampling to examine the distribution of lamprey as a basis for inferences. Some useful information would be gathered by the proposed research, but the ISRP doubts much more would be learned than at the Cedar Creek study; consequently, reviewers place a low priority on this study design.
Recommendation:
Date:
Jul 19, 2002
Comment:
Statement of Potential Biological Benefit to ESU
Comments
Not Reviewed
Already ESA Req?
Biop?
Recommendation:
C
Date:
Jul 23, 2002
Comment:
Recommend deferring to Subbasin Planning; not a priority species at this time.
Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Oct 30, 2002
Comment: