FY 2002 Mountain Snake proposal 200206200
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 |
|---|---|
| 28034 Narrative | Narrative |
| 28034 Sponsor Response to the ISRP | Response |
| 28034 Powerpoint Presentation | Powerpoint Presentation |
| Mountain Snake: Salmon Subbasin Map with BPA Fish & Wildlife Projects | Subbasin Map |
| Mountain Snake: Salmon Subbasin Map with BPA Fish & Wildlife Projects | Subbasin Map |
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Chinook Salmon Smolt Survival and Smolt to Adult Return Rate Quantification, South Fork Salmon River, Idaho |
| Proposal ID | 200206200 |
| Organization | Nez Perce Tribe (NPT) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
| Name | Jerald Lockhart |
| Mailing address | P. O. Box 1942 McCall, Idaho 83638 |
| Phone / email | 2086345290 / jerryl@nezperce.org |
| Manager authorizing this project | Jaime Pinkham, DFRM |
| Review cycle | Mountain Snake |
| Province / Subbasin | Mountain Snake / Salmon |
| Short description | Monitor smolt production and adult escapement in the South Fork Salmon River with PIT-tag detections to provide SARs and R/S ratios as performance measures. |
| Target species | Spring/summer chinook salmon |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 45.03 | -115.72 | Expanded antenna Pit-tag reader |
| 45.02 | -115.7092 | Expanded antenna Pit-tag reader and rotary screw trap |
| 45.005 | -115.705 | Expanded antenna Pit-tag reader |
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Sponsor-reported:
| RPA |
|---|
| Hydro RPA Action 107 |
| Hydro RPA Action 118 |
| Hatchery RPA Action 169 |
| RM&E RPA Action 185 |
| RM&E RPA Action 189 |
| 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 |
|---|
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
| Project ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 8909800 | Idaho Salmon Supplementation, IDFG | Provide data and analysis for cooperative statewide program |
| 8909801 | Idaho Salmon Supplementation, USFWS | Provide data and analysis for cooperative statewide program |
| 8909802 | Idaho Salmon Supplementation, NPT | Provide data and analysis for cooperative statewide program |
| 8909803 | Idaho Salmon supplementation, SBT | Provide data and analysis for cooperative statewide program |
| 9604300 | JCAPE M&E | Use JCAPE data for ISS project stream |
| 9703000 | Monitor Listed Stock | Cooperate with project to use video facilities |
| 9701500 | Imnaha Smolt and Adult Monitoring | Cooperate to develop equipment and methodology for SAR |
| 9107300 | Idaho Natural Production Monitoring and Eval | Data from PIT-tagged steelhead will be shared with this project |
| 9103000 | Chinook Salmon Viability Assessment | Results from the proposed project will be used as input |
| 8712702 | Comparative Survival Rate | Provide additional PIT-tags and SARs to be evaluated |
| 9703800 | Preserve Salmonid Gametes | Provide manpower for in field collection and time for collections |
| McCall Fish Hatchery LSRCP Evaluations | Provide input on hatchery stray rates | |
| NPT, LSRCP Hatchery Evaluations | Provide input on hatchery stray rates | |
| University of Idaho | Provide recovery at natal streams of radio tags and spawning | |
| IDFG Salmonid Winter Ecology | Winter movement rates on PIT-tagged fish | |
| IDFG Annual Escapement Monitoring | Data to develop adults/redd indexes | |
| RPA Action 9 | Provide measures of performance standards that are used to plan | |
| RPA Action 20 | PIT-tag detections are used to set MOP and gate depth criteria | |
| RPA Action 47 | Performance measures are used to assess delayed mortality | |
| RPA Action 107 | Performance measures of adults after they pass the FCRPS | |
| RPA Action 118 | Evaluates upstream performance of adults after passage | |
| RPA Action 169 | Monitor impacts of hatchery fish on natural populations | |
| RPA Action 179 | Define population on a biological basis for recovery goals | |
| RPA Action 180 | Provides a monitoring site with accurate data collection | |
| RPA Action 185 | Provides a performance measure to evaluate juvenile passage | |
| RPA Action 188 | Provides a performance measure of upstream for comparison | |
| RPA Action 189 | Provides performance measure to monitor passage histories | |
| RPA Action 193 | Develops new technology to monitor adult movements |
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design 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 Planning and Design phase
Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation 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 Construction and Implementation phase
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 | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.Collect and analyze information on abundance, selected life history characteristics/patterns, and spatial distribution of upper South Fork Salmon River juvenile summer chinook salmon. | a. Collect juvenile chinook to PIT tag a minimum of 2,100 (400 supplemental summer parr, 400 parr, 500 presmolts, and 800 smolts) for survival estimates and PIT tag an additional 8,900 fish for a total of 11,000 fish to quantify smolt-to-adult estimates. | 30 | $130,000 | |
| b. Determine the age of chinook by examining their scales, size of fish and time of year captured to construct an age at migration, frequency-distribution curve. | 30 | $15,000 | ||
| c. Mark and release a portion of the fish captured and PIT tagged upstream of the trap site. Record the number of these fish that are recaptured. Use these numbers to calculate trap efficiencies and relate trap efficiencies to stream flow. | 30 | $15,000 | ||
| d. Use actual numbers captured, along with trap efficiencies, to develop an overall run-timing curve for juveniles produced fish in upper SFSR. | 30 | $9,000 | ||
| e. Interrogate PIT-tagged summer chinook juveniles at the Snake and Columbia River Dams. Calculate the survival of chinook and steelhead PIT-tagged smolts that reach Lower Granite Dam based the SURPH Model. | 30 | $15,000 | ||
| f. Determine smolt-to-adult survival from Lower Granite to Johnson Creek by dividing the estimate of the number of smolts arriving at Lower Granite by the number of returning adults to Johnson from the same migration year and production strategy. | 30 | $35,000 | ||
| g. Compare the arrival times of the various groups of fish at the Snake and Columbia River dams. | 30 | $5,000 | ||
| h. Summarize and compare the relative outmigration success and outmigration timing of PIT-tagged groups of summer chinook through the Snake River and Columbia River transport and sampling facilities. | 30 | $10,000 | ||
| i. Arrival timing and survival will be analyzed using PTAGIS databases and the SURPH model. | 30 | $10,000 | ||
| 2. Monitor adult passage from the ocean to the upper SFSR and utilized ongoing projects for adult passage to the two other major tributaries for a complete SFSR basin analysis. | a.On a weekly basis, make queries of the PTAGIS database to determine the number of PIT-tagged adults that have been detected at Bonneville Dam and LGD for juveniles released from the upper SFSR. Enumerate the abundance of adult migrant detections. | 30 | $10,000 | |
| b. Install expanded antennae and PIT-tag transceiver in the upper SFSR, to quantify adult escapement into the upper SFSR. This will require assistance from an engineer from the manufacturer. | 30 | $75,000 | ||
| c. Install expanded antennae and PIT-tag transceivers in Secesh River near the mouth and in the Secesh River and Lake Creek video passive weirs. | 30 | $75,000 | ||
| d. Monitor the expanded antennae transceivers and download data on a daily basis. A minimum survival between LGD and the natal stream will be calculated for PIT-tagged fish. | 30 | $10,000 | ||
| e. Calculate adult escapement estimate for upper SFSR from PIT tag detections. | 30 | $10,000 | ||
| f. From the video monitoring project, we will test the PIT tag adult estimate with the actual number of adults entering Secesh River and Lake Creek from the passive video weir escapement numbers. | 30 | $8,000 | ||
| 3. Collect and analyze baseline information of genetic characteristics/patterns upper SFSR summer chinook salmon. | a. Conduct sampling in order to detect genetic changes in gene frequency or total genetic variability. | 30 | $5,000 | |
| b. Measure the amount of genetic change. | 30 | $5,000 | Yes | |
| c. Identify possible causes of genetic change | 30 | $5,000 | Yes | |
| d. Identify management steps to reduce further changes. | 30 | $5,000 | ||
| 4. Compile and analyze South Fork Salmon River Basin SAR and R/S estimates using data from Secesh River, Johnson Creek, and upper SFSR studies to get a combined SFSR Basin estimate. | a. Enumerate all spring/summer chinook salmon migrants from all screw traps in SFSR.. Using queries of the PTAGIS database, we will enumerate the minimum number of PIT-tagged smolts that reach LGD for each stream and season.. | 30 | $10,000 | |
| b. Determine the age of chinook by examining their scales, size of fish and time of year captured to construct an age at migration, frequency-distribution curve. | 30 | $5,000 | ||
| c. Use actual numbers captured, along with trap efficiencies, to develop an overall run-timing curve for juveniles produced fish in SFSR Basin. | 30 | $5,000 | ||
| d. Interrogate PIT-tagged summer chinook juveniles at the Snake and Columbia River Dams. Calculate the survival of chinook and steelhead PIT-tagged smolts that reach Lower Granite Dam based the SURPH Model. | 30 | $5,000 | ||
| e. Determine smolt-to-adult survival from Lower Granite to SFSR Basin by dividing the estimate of the number of smolts arriving at Lower Granite by the number of returning adults SFSR basin from the same brood year. | 30 | $10,000 | ||
| f. Compare the arrival times of the various life stage groups of fish at the Snake and Columbia River dams. | 30 | $5,000 | ||
| g. Summarize and compare the relative outmigration success and outmigration timing of PIT-tagged groups of summer chinook through the Snake River and Columbia River transport and sampling facilities. | 30 | $3,000 | ||
| h. Arrival timing and survival will be analyzed using PTAGIS databases and the SURPH model. | 30 | $5,000 | ||
| i. Combine the data from each stream into one group to represent the total SFSR. Use this data to calculate the R/S ratios for the SFSR. | 30 | $10,000 | ||
| j. Document stray rates of hatchery and natural fish within the basin through detections of PIT tags at each tributary stream. | 30 | $5,000 | ||
| k. We will conduct Minimum Viable Metapopulations analysis on adult abundances from each tributary to determine estimate population persistence. | 30 | $10,000 | ||
| 5. Transfer of Technology. | a. Prepare three Quarterly Progress Reports. | 30 | $35,000 | |
| b. Prepare and provide an annual report summarizing all tasks outlined in objectives one through four above. | 30 | $85,000 | ||
| c. Presentation of results and major findings to professional staff and meetings/conferences | 30 | $15,000 |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Collect and analyze information on abundance, selected life history characteristics/patterns, and spatial distribution of upper South Fork Salmon River juvenile summer chinook salmon. | 2003 | 2006 | $956,064 |
| 2. Monitor adult passage from the ocean to the upper SFSR and utilized ongoing projects for adult passage to the two other major tributaries for a complete SFSR basin analysis. | 2003 | 2006 | $736,640 |
| 3. Collect and analyze baseline information of genetic characteristics/patterns upper SFSR summer chinook salmon. | 2003 | 2006 | $78,366 |
| 4. Compile and analyze South Fork Salmon River Basin SAR and R/S estimates using data from Secesh River, Johnson Creek, and upper SFSR studies to get a combined SFSR Basin estimate. | 2003 | 2006 | $286,035 |
| 5. Transfer of Technology. | 2003 | 2006 | $528,970 |
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
| FY 2003 | FY 2004 | FY 2005 | FY 2006 |
|---|---|---|---|
| $600,000 | $630,000 | $661,500 | $694,575 |
Section 8. Estimated budget summary
Itemized budget
| Item | Note | FY 2002 cost |
|---|---|---|
| Personnel | FTE: 5.6 | $184,464 |
| Fringe | 40.44% of salaries | $74,295 |
| Supplies | $99,432 | |
| Travel | Trips to Seattle, Portland, Boise, field, 2 GSA vehicles | $32,907 |
| Indirect | 20.9% of Personnel and Operating Costs | $96,902 |
| Capital | Camp Trailer, Trap, Pit-tag Table, PIT tag readers and expanded antenna readers, and solar panels. | $122,500 |
| PIT tags | # of tags: 13000 | $29,250 |
| Subcontractor | Engineering, aging, genetics, statistics | $20,250 |
| $660,000 | ||
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2002 cost | $660,000 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2002 budget request | $660,000 |
| FY 2002 forecast from 2001 | $0 |
| % change from forecast | 0.0% |
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.
Recommendation:
Fundable only if response is adequate
Fundable only if response is adequate
Date:
Sep 28, 2001
Sep 28, 2001
Comment:
A response is needed. The proponents should clarify the relationship of this project to #199102800"Monitoring smolt migrations of wild Snake River sp/sum chinook salmon." This is a good research proposal with the primary goal to calculate and monitor smolt-to-adult returns (SARs) and recruits per spawner ratios (R/S) of summer chinook salmon in the upper South Fork Salmon River basin. Study design has been carefully considered including obtaining statistical estimates of the necessary sample sizes to achieve useful results. Completion of this study, integrated with other ongoing studies in the basin, should allow estimation of South Fork Salmon River Basin (SFSB) juvenile survival, adult returns, SARs, and R/S (recruits per spawner). However, we found it strange that the proponents did not discuss interaction with Project #199102800"Monitoring smolt migrations of wild Snake River sp/sum chinook salmon." There is potential for overlap based on the following statements from proposal #199102800"Currently, we have five environmental monitoring sites. The monitors are located in the streams near the Secesh River juvenile migrant trap, the South Fork Salmon River trap by Knox Bridge, the Marsh Creek trap, the Sawtooth Hatchery intake/trap, and the Valley Creek U. S. Geological Survey site." Also, project #199102800 indicates that they work at "South Fork Salmon River-between river km 112 and 122, Valley County, Idaho." The proponents should ensure that their data and metadata are made available via STREAMNET or other suitable electronic database.Comment:
This project addresses RPA 180.Comment:
The proponents adequately addressed the ISRP concerns. This is a good research proposal with the primary goal to calculate and monitor smolt-to-adult returns (SARs) and recruits per spawner ratios (R/S) of summer chinook salmon in the upper South Fork Salmon River basin. Study design has been carefully considered including obtaining statistical estimates of the necessary sample sizes to achieve useful results. Completion of this study, integrated with other ongoing studies in the basin, should allow estimation of South Fork Salmon River Basin (SFSB) juvenile survival, adult returns, SARs, and R/S (recruits per spawner). -The proponents should ensure that their data and metadata are made available via STREAMNET or other suitable electronic database.Comment:
Statement of Potential Biological Benefit to ESUBenefits are indirect. Monitor the production, migration, and survival of spring/summer chinook in the South Fork Salmon River basin using primarily smolt-to-adult return rate and recruit-per-spawner ratios to evaluate progress toward recovery. Addresses many RPA items indirectly (will add data to assist other researchers). Includes a genetic component that seems a little excessive given all their other goals.
Comments
Very important RME in the SR basin. The core of an RME pilot?
Already ESA Req? No
Biop? Yes
Comment:
Do not recommend. The project could be reconsidered when a regional RM&E plan is completed and the need for the project can be properly assessed. BPA RPA RPM:
--
NMFS RPA/USFWS RPM:
Mult. Esp 180
Comment:
Council recommendation: This new proposal is being advanced for its responsiveness to the Biological Opinion monitoring and evaluation RPA. The NMFS comments state that the proposal addresses "multiple" RPAs and especially RPA 180. The NMFS comments call it a "very important" monitoring and evaluation proposal for the Snake River basin, and that it could form the "core of an R,M &E pilot." The ISRP review was very favorable, and emphasized the value of the products that would be delivered. Funding this new work is consistent with the Council's general funding principles that put a priority on responding to Biological Opinion needs.The Bonneville comments provided the only negative input for the proposal. Bonneville recommended that the proposal not be funded until a broader research, monitoring, and evaluation plan is completed.
The Council recommends funding this proposal for the reasons provided by the NMFS and ISRP comments. The proposal is one of a limited set that address the monitoring and evaluation RPAs, and this one seems to have been particularly impressive to NMFS. Further, the Council recommends that NMFS, Bonneville, and the other Action Agencies look to this proposal and the others like it recommended in this province to meet ESA monitoring and evaluation needs rather than initiate other projects that have not been coordinated and reviewed through the provincial process.
Comment:
Fund with following conditions: scope of Work and budget will be developed in coordination with NMFS and BPA to meet the needs of RPA's 180 and/or 183. Project management will require adherence to specific timelines (at least annually) for analysis and reporting to assess needs for project modifications and scope change. Project may be modified after the Regional RM&E plan is developed. Final funding level will be determined in contract negotiations.Comment:
Not funded. BPA says delay until RM&E plan established. Increases due to delayed start. No scope change. NOAA fisheries sending letter - they have re-evaluated ranking for RPA. Will receive a #2 vs #3.Comment:
New project