FY 2000 proposal 198740100

Additional documents

TitleType
198740100 Narrative Narrative
198740100 Sponsor Response to the ISRP Response

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal titleAssessment of Smolt Condition: Biological and Environmental Interactions
Proposal ID198740100
OrganizationU.S. Geological Survey, Biological Resources Division, Columbia River Research Laboratory (USGS)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
NameR. M. Schrock, A. G. Maule
Mailing address5501A Cook-Underwood Rd. Cook, WA 98605
Phone / email5095382299 / Robin_Schrock@usgs.gov
Manager authorizing this project
Review cycleFY 2000
Province / SubbasinMainstem/Systemwide / Systemwide
Short descriptionEvaluate the biology of wild and hatchery salmonids by determining the effects of rearing and river conditions on smolt quality; assist hatchery managers in producing fish with wild-like characteristics and thereby increase smolt-to-adult returns.
Target speciessalmonids species: Oncorhynchus spp.
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
1998 Obj.1 & 2. hatchery evaluation in progress
1998 Obj. 3. results of lysozyme research reported
1998 Obj 4. provided technical assistance to 2 USFWS, 2 USGS, 1 COE, and 4 WDFW smolt monitoring projects
1998 Assessment of Smolt Condition for Travel Time Analysis: Project Review 1987-1997
1998 Developed cooperative project with USFWS, Idaho Fishery Resource Office under Obj 4.
1998 Sponsor 20th Smolt Workshop in cooperation with WDFW, scheduled Feb 1-3, 1999 Olympia, Washington
1997 Hatchery rearing conditions survey completed for 10 hatcheries
1997 Smolt condition assessment technical assistance to 15 projects, including to 3 USFWS, 2 USGS, 2 COE, 4 WDFW
1997 Cooperative research with USFWS to determine effects of enhanced feeds on growth and disease resistance in chinook salmon
1996 Cooperative research with USFWS to enhance smolt performance with glucan feeds, continued monitoring for FPC
1995 Conducted cooperative research with USFWS, continued monitoring for FPC
1995 Conducted gas bubble monitoring of juvenile salmon at 6 dams on the Snake and Columbia Rivers, continued monitoring for FPC
1994 Sampling with NMFS Lower Granite Survival Study continued from 1993, continued monitoring for FPC

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Project IDTitleDescription
9102900 Supplementation and survival of fall chinook in Snake River smolt assessment technical assistance
9801005 Pittsbugh Landing Creek portable acclimation release facility smolt assessment technical assistance
USGS-Performance and stock productivity impacts of hatchery supplementation smolt assessment technical assistance
USGS-COE Eval.of Collection, Transport, Passage of Outmigrating Salmon smolt assessment technical assistance
WDFW-Cowlitz Falls Anadromous Fish Reintroduction Project smolt assessment technical assistance
WDFW-Snake River Lab Acclimation and direct stream release of chinook smolt assessment technical assistance
WDFW, Chelan PUD-Temperature, precocity, residualism in steelhead smolt assessment technical assistance
WDFW-Survival differences in coho salmon under seminatural rearing smolt assessment technical assistance
8740100 Assessment of Smolt Condition: Biological and Environmental Interactions.
9082 Evaluate feeding strategies to reduce residualism in steelhead
20542 Biological Monitoring of Columbia Basin Salmonids

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2000 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 2000 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 2000 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 2000 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget
ItemNoteFY 2000 cost
Personnel 2 FT, 2 1/4T $107,272
Fringe $25,341
Supplies $5,000
Operating $0
Capital computer upgrade and software for database $3,500
Travel includes vehicle for 6 months $4,500
Indirect $53,433
$199,046
Total estimated budget
Total FY 2000 cost$199,046
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds$0
Total FY 2000 budget request$199,046
FY 2000 forecast from 1999$0
% change from forecast0.0%
Cost sharing
OrganizationItem or service providedAmountCash or in-kind
All technical assistance projects cover materials and labor for the assistance activities (figure based on 1997 & 1998). $10,000 unknown
Other budget explanation

Schedule Constraints: Coordination of technical assistance activities within cooperative agency project schedules.


Reviews and recommendations

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

Recommendation:
Delay Funding
Date:
Jun 15, 1999

Comment:

Recommendation: Delay funding until they provide a more precise statistical analysis protocol that is supported by the sampling design and data. The entire set of smolt monitoring projects needs to receive a programmatic review with one of the goals to develop and justify a program-wide design that really is capable of delivering enough data, of high enough precision, to answer the management questions.

Comments: The proposal explains and references the need for addressing the problem. The relationship with high priority programs is clearly presented. The objectives are clearly stated. However, a statistically sound analysis of the data is essential. Collaboration with statistical support personnel from other funded projects is recommended. There is a need for a review of the overall design. They need to explain how river conditions will be measured in order to establish relevance to the experimental subjects. The design is too complicated, convoluted, and overly optimistic. A bottleneck in their design is their ability to measure smolt to adult survival. They are going to establish physiological indicators but it is not assured that they will be able to make any correlation.


Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Aug 20, 1999

Comment:


Recommendation:
Date:
Aug 20, 1999

Comment:

This project should be re-named. Provides tech. support for other smolt physiology projects. Does not fit only under SMP.
Recommendation:
Date:
Aug 20, 1999

Comment:

Technical Criteria 1: Met? Yes - Question the need to continue this work. What is needed is a summary of the results of the past 10+ years work.

Programmatic Criteria 2: Met? Yes -

Milestone Criteria 3: Met? No -

Resource Criteria 4: Met? Yes -


Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Oct 29, 1999

Comment:

Fund. The response did an acceptable job of addressing gaps identified in the ISRP comments. The statistical analysis protocol for this project is clearer now. The proposed methods of analysis are appropriate for the purposes of the project. The fact that the initial analyses are exploratory indicates that establishment of correlation between specific rearing and river conditions on smolt quality may not be possible. This problem is a consequence of the relatively few years of data of outmigration performance. The proposed methods of statistical analysis are clear but it is not clear whether the anticipated data will be sufficient in quantity or quality to support meaningful conclusions.

The ISRP continues to emphasize that the entire smolt monitoring program needs a programmatic review: there are many outstanding questions about overall design, priorities, coordination, data management, and information synthesis from the results.


Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Nov 8, 1999

Comment:


Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Mar 1, 2000

Comment:

[Decision made in 11-3-99 Council Meeting]