FY 2002 Mountain Snake proposal 28042
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 |
|---|---|
| 28042 Narrative | Narrative |
| 28042 Powerpoint Presentation | Powerpoint Presentation |
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Timing and location of spawning by pure and introgressed cutthroat trout in the North Fork Clearwater River |
| Proposal ID | 28042 |
| Organization | Nez Perce Tribe (NPT) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
| Name | David P. Statler |
| Mailing address | 3404 Highway 12 Orofino, ID 83544 |
| Phone / email | 2084767417 / daves@nezperce.org |
| Manager authorizing this project | Jaime Pinkham |
| Review cycle | Mountain Snake |
| Province / Subbasin | Mountain Snake / Clearwater |
| Short description | The goal of this project is to precisely identify spawning areas and accurately determine the timing of spawning for pure and introgressed westslope cutthroat trout using state-of-the-art radio telemetry systems. |
| Target species | Westslope cutthroat trout |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 46.5027 | -116.331 | North Fork Clearwater River |
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Sponsor-reported:
| RPA |
|---|
| RM&E RPA Action 193 |
| Habitat RPA Action 155 |
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
| Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
|---|
Section 2. Past accomplishments
| Year | Accomplishment |
|---|
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
| Project ID | Title | Description |
|---|
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Using conventional and EMG transmitters, identify when and where fish are spawning, and examine the timing and duration of the spawning season | a. Implant trout with conventional and electromyogram (EMG) transmitters. Calibrate EMG tag output to swimming speed in a Blazka respirometer at streamside | 3 | $61,871 | Yes |
| b. Determine the rate of movement of upstream migrating fish, identify spawning locations, and examine the timing and duration of the spawning season | 3 | $159,594 | Yes | |
| 2. Examine the movements or pure and introgressed rainbow trout during summer and fall | a Track cutthroat trout from spawning areas to overwintering areas | 3 | $17,656 | |
| 3. Prepare annual report | Task a. Analyze data and produce report/ paper | 3 | $72,757 | Yes |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Using conventional and EMG transmitters, identify when and where fish are spawning, and examine the timing and duration of the spawning season | 2003 | 2004 | $442,873 |
| 2. Examine the movements or pure and introgressed rainbow trout during summer and fall | 2003 | 2004 | $37,430 |
| 3. Prepare annual report | 2003 | 2004 | $145,516 |
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase
| FY 2003 | FY 2004 |
|---|---|
| $312,910 | $312,910 |
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 |
|---|
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 2002 cost |
|---|---|---|
| Personnel | FTE: 1.3 | $44,336 |
| Fringe | $12,414 | |
| Supplies | $3,489 | |
| Travel | $5,000 | |
| Indirect | $13,981 | |
| Subcontractor | 1 | $227,774 |
| Other | operations | $4,884 |
| $311,878 | ||
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2002 cost | $311,878 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2002 budget request | $311,878 |
| 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.
Do not fund - no response required
Sep 28, 2001
Comment:
Do not fund; a response is not warranted. The project emphasizes performance of a technique (EMG radiotelemetry) but lacks adequate investigational design and management ties. In its current form the work would neither answer the introgression question nor aid in reducing the impacts of non-native salmonids. Project PI's are very active researchers and leaders in EMG telemetry, but the proposal is lacking in population and genetic considerations that form the heart of the project and the questions it is attempting to address.Previous studies have established that hybridization between westslope cutthroat trout (WCT) and introduced rainbow trout (RBT) is widespread in the drainage, and that some pure WCT still exist there. Therefore, WCT are obviously spawning with RBT, and three related types of fish must be present: pure WCT, pure RBT, and hybrids (perhaps also others, as mentioned below). The sponsor proposes to radiotelemetrically track WCT and hybrids to find out where and when they spawn "since the mechanisms that limit the potential for hybridization between cutthroat trout and rainbow trout include aggressive spawning behavior and spatial separation between spawning sites." No clear justification emerges from that statement. It is not stated why only WCT and hybrids—and not also RBT, the source of the hybridization—would be tracked. Most importantly, it is not stated how the study's results could be applied, i.e., what management the hoped-for findings could lead to that might remedy the hybridization threat to pure WCT populations.
Comment:
This project could be improved if it were more closely tied to the new stocking strategy employed by the IDFG for Dworshak reservoir. IDFG would place a higher priority on identifying solutions to the introgression problem.The objective of the proposed research project is to identify the timing and location of spawning by pure and introgressed westslope cutthroat trout (WCT) using radio-telemetry in the North Fork Clearwater drainage, Idaho. The project objectives will aid with recovery efforts and is consistent with the goals of the Northwest Power Planning Council's 2000 Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program, Idaho Fish and Game, and the Nez Perce Tribe.
The construction/implementation budget seems high for the proposed work statement, especially since only 40 fish will be monitored annually. It is unclear why the supporting agency needs to contract out these services to a subcontractor for $227,774 during FY2002 and 2003; possibly hiring a well-trained seasonal technician will reduce costs. A more detailed justification is needed to address the cost breakdown. Clearly, the PI's are well-established authorities in the field of radio-telemetry. The sponsor should reconsider using a subcontractor to perform the described duties. The RFC views the concept of the proposal as a High Priority.
Comment:
Not fundable. A response was not requested for this project. The project emphasizes performance of a technique (EMG radiotelemetry) but lacks adequate investigational design and management ties. In its current form the work would neither answer the introgression question nor aid in reducing the impacts of non-native salmonids. Project PI's are very active researchers and leaders in EMG telemetry, but the proposal is lacking in population and genetic considerations which should form the heart of the project and the questions it is attempting to address.Previous studies have established that hybridization between westslope cutthroat trout (WCT) and introduced rainbow trout (RBT) is widespread in the drainage, and that some pure WCT still exist there. Therefore, WCT are obviously spawning with RBT, and three related types of fish must be present: pure WCT, pure RBT, and hybrids (perhaps also others, as mentioned below). The sponsor proposes to radiotelemetrically track WCT and hybrids to find out where and when they spawn "since the mechanisms that limit the potential for hybridization between cutthroat trout and rainbow trout include aggressive spawning behavior and spatial separation between spawning sites." No clear justification emerges from that statement. It is not stated why only WCT and hybrids—and not also RBT, the source of the hybridization—would be tracked. Most importantly, it is not stated how the study's results could be applied, i.e., what management the hoped-for findings could lead to that might remedy the hybridization threat to pure WCT populations.
Comment:
Statement of Potential Biological Benefit to ESUComments
Already ESA Req?
Biop?
Comment:
Do not recommend. BPA RPA RPM:
--
NMFS RPA/USFWS RPM:
--
Comment: