Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Evaluate Status of White Sturgeon in the Hells Canyon Reach Snake River, ID |
| Proposal ID | 9056 |
| Organization | Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator |
| Name | Tim Cochnauer |
| Mailing address | 1540 Warner Ave. Lewiston, ID 83501 |
| Phone / email | 2087995010 / tcochnau@idfg.state.id.us |
| Manager authorizing this project | |
| Review cycle | FY 1999 |
| Province / Subbasin | Lower Snake / Snake River Drainage, Idaho |
| Short description | Determine the population status of white sturgeon Acipenser transmontanus in the Hells Canyon reach of the Snake River, ID. by continuing to capture fish for mark-recapture analysis and comparison with previous studies. |
| Target species | |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
| Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
|---|
Section 2. Past accomplishments
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 1999 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 1999 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 1999 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 1999 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 1999 cost |
|---|
| Personnel |
Fishery Tech-12 mos; Bio-aide--8 mos |
$37,400 |
| Fringe |
@36% |
$13,500 |
| Supplies |
|
$8,100 |
| Operating |
|
$19,800 |
| Capital |
PIT tag scanner |
$3,500 |
| Tag |
200 |
$580 |
| Travel |
|
$2,000 |
| Indirect |
@21.3% |
$17,300 |
| Subcontractor |
|
$0 |
| $102,180 |
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 1999 cost | $102,180 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 1999 budget request | $102,180 |
| FY 1999 forecast from 1998 | $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 if funds available
Date:
May 13, 1998
Comment:
Presentation: IDFG has management responsibility for the Snake River to the Washington border. The construction of Lower Granite Dam isolated sturgeon in this reach. Currently the sturgeon fishery is limited to catch and release. The goal of this study is to estimate the current population and measure changes since the population was last assessed in the 1970s and 1980s. Questions/Answers:
How is this project related to and how does it build on other sturgeon projects in the area? Answer: This section of the river is managed by Oregon, Washington, Idaho, and the Nez Perce Tribe. Idaho feels left out of the loop in some areas and this proposal addresses our needs separate from the whole Columbia River. Sturgeon project 8605000 does not cover this area.
Were you involved in the biological risk assessment? Answer: The risk assessment identified needs and put together a plan but the plan was not developed by the agencies involved in the risk assessment.
How were the 1970-1980 studies used for management recommendations? Answer: The earlier efforts were baseline studies which looked at age classes. Our intent is to evaluate the changing age structure through time. This will lead to refinements in the harvest regulations. The catch and release fishery was implemented based on the previous studies. We now want to look at the sport fishery to see if we can allow harvest
Screening Criteria: Yes
Technical Criteria: Yes
Programmatic Criteria: No. The co-managers need to coordinate projects (e.g. 9700900) prior to implementation to avoid duplication.
General Comment: Coordination should not increase costs for these projects
Recommendation:
Fund (low priority)
Date:
May 13, 1998
Comment:
Recommendation:
Adequate
Date:
Jun 18, 1998
Comment:
The proposed work and its value are clearly described and the study design looks good. Reviewers had only minor cautionary comments about the proposed work. Relying on angling for sampling may bias the sample by age; however, the principal investigators are primarily interested in older fish, which are susceptible to angling. The principal investigators appear to have a narrow expectation of what age-structure indicates a healthy population.