FY 1999 proposal 9056

Additional documents

TitleType
9056 Narrative Narrative

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal titleEvaluate Status of White Sturgeon in the Hells Canyon Reach Snake River, ID
Proposal ID9056
OrganizationIdaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
NameTim Cochnauer
Mailing address1540 Warner Ave. Lewiston, ID 83501
Phone / email2087995010 / tcochnau@idfg.state.id.us
Manager authorizing this project
Review cycleFY 1999
Province / SubbasinLower Snake / Snake River Drainage, Idaho
Short descriptionDetermine 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
LatitudeLongitudeDescription
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Sponsor-reported:

RPA

Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:

Reviewing agencyAction #BiOp AgencyDescription

Section 2. Past accomplishments

YearAccomplishment

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Project IDTitleDescription

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 1999 costSubcontractor
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 1999 costSubcontractor
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 1999 costSubcontractor
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 1999 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget
ItemNoteFY 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 forecast0.ToString("0.0%"))
Cost sharing
OrganizationItem or service providedAmountCash or in-kind
Outyear budget totals

(working on it)


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.