FY 2002 Mountain Snake proposal 28011

Additional documents

TitleType
28011 Narrative Narrative

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal titleIncidental Mortality in Selective Sport Fisheries
Proposal ID28011
OrganizationIdaho Department of Fish and Game and Idaho Office of Species Conservation (IDFG/IOSC)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
NameSharon Kiefer
Mailing addressPO Box 25 Boise, Idaho 83707-0025
Phone / email2083343791 / skiefer@idfg.state.id.us
Manager authorizing this projectVirgil Moore, Chief of Fisheries, IDFG
Review cycleMountain Snake
Province / SubbasinMountain Snake / Salmon
Short descriptionConduct literature review and scoping for a contemporary study of incidental mortality rates in selective sport fisheries
Target speciesSummer Steelhead and Spring/Summer Chinook
Project location
LatitudeLongitudeDescription
46.4 -115.66 Clearwater River Subbasin
46.4 -115.66 Salmon River Subbasin
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Sponsor-reported:

RPA
Action 167

Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:

Reviewing agencyAction #BiOp AgencyDescription
NMFS Action 167 NMFS The Action Agencies shall work with NMFS, USFWS, and Tribal and state fishery management agencies to develop improved methods for estimating incidental mortalities in fisheries, with particular emphasis on selective fisheries in the Columbia River basin, doing so within the time frame necessary to make new marking and selective fishery regimes feasible. The Action Agencies shall initiate studies and/or develop methods by the 3-year check-in.

Section 2. Past accomplishments

YearAccomplishment

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Project IDTitleDescription
Idaho Natural Monitoring & Evaluation Additional information on spawning escapements
Steelhead Supplementation Studies Additional information on spawning escapements
Idaho Supplementation Studies Additional information on spawning escapements
Lower Snake River Compensation Program Additional information on spawning escapements

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2002 costSubcontractor
1. Literature Review FY 2002 $50,000
2. Project Development a. Scoping, including radio tracking FY 2002 $100,000
b. Proposal FY 2002 $50,000
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase

Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2002 costSubcontractor
$0
$0
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase

Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2002 costSubcontractor
$0
$0
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase

Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2002 costSubcontractor
1. Estimate Incidental Mortality Rates a. Field Studies 2003-2006 $0
b. Analysis 2003-2006 $0
c. Reporting 2006-2007 $0
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
1. Estimate Incidental Mortality Rates 2002 2006 $1,100,000
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
FY 2003FY 2004FY 2005FY 2006
$200,000$300,000$300,000$300,000

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget
ItemNoteFY 2002 cost
Personnel $62,300
Fringe $21,800
Supplies $12,000
Travel $7,000
Indirect $20,800
Capital $76,100
$200,000
Total estimated budget
Total FY 2002 cost$200,000
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds$0
Total FY 2002 budget request$200,000
FY 2002 forecast from 2001$0
% change from forecast0.0%
Cost sharing
OrganizationItem or service providedAmountCash or in-kind

Reviews and recommendations

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

Recommendation:
Do not fund - no response required
Date:
Sep 28, 2001

Comment:

Do not fund. A response is not warranted. This is a request for funding to develop a proposal for estimating impact of catch and release fishing on non-hatchery salmon and steelhead in the Snake River. The background includes a statement that "Early work in the Snake River basin led to the conclusion anadromous adults could be released in selective fisheries with acceptable impacts (Pettit 1977)." The present proposal should have included what about that assessment is faulty and how its shortcomings (and shortcomings of other studies) will be overcome with a new study.

This issue has systemwide implications and a cooperative Columbia Basin wide study may be more appropriate. The mainstem and systemwide solicitation will begin in late fall and winter of 2001. A detailed proposal could be prepared in cooperation with other interested parties for the mainstem or systemwide solicitation.


Recommendation:
Recommended Action
Date:
Nov 30, 2001

Comment:

Addresses RPA 167. The reviewers believe this proposal should be submitted for review through the Systemwide/Mainstem Province review due to systemwide implications.
Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Dec 21, 2001

Comment:

Do not fund. This is a request for funding to develop a proposal for estimating impact of catch and release fishing on non-hatchery salmon and steelhead in the Snake River. The background includes a statement that "Early work in the Snake River basin led to the conclusion anadromous adults could be released in selective fisheries with acceptable impacts (Pettit 1977)." The present proposal should have included what about that assessment is faulty and how its shortcomings (and shortcomings of other studies) will be overcome with a new study.

This issue has systemwide implications and a cooperative Columbia Basin wide study may be more appropriate. The mainstem and systemwide solicitation will begin in late fall and winter of 2001. A detailed proposal could be prepared in cooperation with other interested parties for the mainstem or systemwide solicitation.


Recommendation:
Date:
Feb 1, 2002

Comment:

Statement of Potential Biological Benefit to ESU
Reductions in impacts of harvest on listed runs in Idaho sport fisheries. Could Improve recreational fishery management

Comments
Cost seems excessive for literature search and scoping. Case not made that current information is not adequate. Project would be valuable if emphasis was on reducing 'uncertainty' and if 'ground-truthing' is a major goal.

Already ESA Req? No

Biop? Yes


Recommendation:
D
Date:
Feb 11, 2002

Comment:

Do not recommend. This proposal does not identify the inadequacies of the existing studies, or estimate the degree to which they may be inaccurate. Without this information, it is not possible to determine whether a new study is warranted.

BPA RPA RPM:
--

NMFS RPA/USFWS RPM:
167


Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Apr 19, 2002

Comment: