Return to Proposal Finder FY 2000 Proposal 20055

Proposal Table of Contents

Additional Documents

Section 1. General Administrative information
Section 2. Past accomplishments
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
Section 4. Objectives, tasks and schedules
Section 5. Budget
Section 6. References
Section 7. Abstract

Reviews and Recommendations
Title Type File Size File Date

Section 1. General Administrative Information

Title of Project Proposal Evaluate a Mark-Resight Survey for Estimating Numbers of Redds
BPA Project Proposal Number 20055
Business name of agency, institution,
or organization requesting funding
U.S. Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station
Business acronym (if appropriate) USFS

Proposal contact person or principal investigator

Name William L. Thompson
Mailing Address 316 E. Myrtle
City, State, Zip Boise, ID 83702
Phone 2083734351
Fax 2083734391
E-mail bthompson/
Manager of program authorizing this project
Review Cycle FY 2000
Province Mountain Snake
Subbasin Salmon
Short Description We propose a pilot study to evaluate the use of a mark-resight survey for obtaining estimates of numbers of Snake River chinook salmon redds. If successful, our method would provide a statistically rigorous means of monitoring salmonid populations.
Target Species Snake River Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha)

Project Location

[No information]

Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Sponsor-Reported Relevant RPAs

Sponsor listed no RPAs for this project proposal

Relevant RPAs based upon NMFS & BPA Review

NMFS and BPA did not associate any reasonable and prudent alternatives with this project proposal

NPPC Program Measure Number(s) which this project addresses: 2.1A, 4.2A, 4.3A, 7.13A, 7.14A, 7.1E
FWS/NMFS Biological Opinion Number(s) which this project addresses: Valid population estimates of Snake River Chinook Salmon are required to: I.-B.-2) Evaluate the relevance of the environmental baseline to the species' current status I.-B.-3) Determine the effects of proposed or continuing action on listed species
Other Planning Document References 1. Monitoring adult chinook spawning escapements is listed as a Critical Data Need by IDFG (1992)

CBFWA-Generated Information

Database Administrator notes on the history of this proposal form: None
Type of Project (assigned by CBFWA Analysts): anadromous

Section 2. Past Accomplishments

n/a or no information

Section 3. Relationships to Other Projects

Project ID Title Description Umbrella
9064 Analyze the Persistence and Spatial Dynamics of Snake River Chinook Salmon Validation of methodology No
9107300 Idaho Natural Production Monitoring/Evaluations Collaborative, information sharing No

Section 4. Objectives, Tasks and Schedules

Objectives and Tasks

Objective Task
1. Evaluate a mark-resight survey for estimating numbers of redds a. Count and map redds via aerial and ground counts.
1. b. Statistical analsis of data and assessment of methodology.

Objective Schedules and Costs

Objective Start Date End Date Measurable Biological Objectives Milestone FY 2000 Cost %
1 09/01/00 12/01/00 X 100.0%

Section 5. Estimated Budget Summary

Itemized Budget

Item Note FY 2000 Cost
Personnel One month for two temporary Scientists to conduct redd counts; 3 months for permanent Scientist $ 27,360
Fringe 20.55% $ 5,623
Supplies Misc. equipment $ 1,000
Operating Vehicle costs $ 1,500
Travel Per diem $ 1,000
Indirect 18% $ 6,567
Total Itemized Budget $ 43,050

Total estimated budget

Total FY 2000 project cost $ 43,050
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA Funds $ 0
Total FY 2000 budget request $ 43,050
FY 2000 forecast from 1999 $ 0
% change from forecast 0.0%

Reason for change in estimated budget

Not applicable

Reason for change in scope

Not applicable

Cost Sharing

Organization Item or service provided Amount Cash or In-Kind
RMRS 2 months permanent biologist salary $ 9,880 unknown
RMRS Operations & Maintenance (helicopter surveys) - BPA Project 9064 $ 31,000 unknown
RMRS Office space, administrative assistance $ 8,400 unknown
RMRS Computer hardware and software for data compilation, word processing, communicaton with cooperators, and analysis $ 5,100 unknown
RMRS GPS units for ground and aerial surveys, GPS and GIS software $ 18,650 unknown


Outyear Budget Totals

Not applicable  

Other Budget Explanation

Schedule Constraints: If weather and water conditions are unsuitable for conducting redd counts during the scheduled time period, counts may have to be postponed until the following year.

Section 6. References

Reference Watershed?
Chapman, D. G. 1951. Some properties of the hypergeometric distribution with applications to zoological censuses. University of California Publications in Statistics 1:131-160. No
Dauble, D. D., and D. G. Watson. 1997. Status of fall chinook salmon populations in the mid-Columbia River, 1948-1992. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 17:283-300. No
Elms-Cockrum, T. J. 1997. Salmon spawning ground surveys, 1996. Idaho Department of Fish and Game Report 97-25, Boise, Idaho. No
Emlen, J. M. 1995. Population viability of the Snake River chinook salmon (Oncorhyncus tshawytscha). Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 52:1442-1448. No
Federal Register. 1998. Endangered and threatened species: withdrawal of proposed rule to list Snake River spring/summer chinook and fall chinook salmon as endangered. Federal Register 63(7):1807-1811. No
Gilbert, R. O. 1973. Approximations of the bias in the Jolly-Seber capture-recapture model. Biometrics 29:501-526. No
Henny, C. J., and D. Anderson. 1979. Osprey distribution, abundance, and status in western North America III. The Baja California and Gulf of California population. Bulletin of the Southern California Academy of Sciences 78:89-106. No
Henny, C. J., M. M. Smith, and V. D. Stotts. 1974. The 1973 distribution and abundance of breeding ospreys in the Chesapeake Bay. Chesapeake Science 15:125-133. No
Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG). 1992. Anadromous fish management plan 1992-1996. Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Boise, Idaho. No
Lee, D. C., and W. E. Grant. 1995. A hierarchical approach to fisheries planning and modeling in the Columbia River Basin. Environmental Management 19:17-25. No
Lee, D. C., J. R. Sedell, B. E. Rieman, R. F. Thurow, and J. E. Williams. 1997. Broadscale assessment of aquatic species and habitats. Volume III, Chapter 4. U.S. For. Serv., Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-405, Portland. No
Magnusson, W. E., G. J. Caughley, and G. C. Grigg. 1978. A double-survey estimate of population size from incomplete counts. Journal of Wildlife Management 42:174-176. No
Marmorek, D. R., and C. N. Peters, editors. 1998. Plan for analyzing and testing hypotheses (PATH): retrospective and prospective analyses of spring/summer chinook reviewed in FY 1997. Compiled and edited by ESSA Technologies, Limited, Vancouver, BC. No
National Research Council. 1996. Upstream: salmon and society in the Pacific Northwest. National Research Council, Washington, D.C. Chapter 3:39-66. No
Nehlsen, W., J. E. Williams, and J. A. Lichatowich. 1991. Pacific salmon at the crossroads: stocks at risk from California, Oregon, Washington, and Idaho. Fisheries 16(2):4-21. No
Northwest Power Planning Council (NWPPC). 1994. 1994 Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program. Portland, Oregon. No
Pollock, K. H., and W. L. Kendall. 1987. Visibility bias in aerial surveys: a review of estimation procedures. Journal of Wildlife Management 51:502-510. No
Rieman, B. E., and D. L. Myers. 1997. Use of redd counts to detect trends in bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) populations. Conservation Biology 11:1015-1018. No
Seber, G. A. F. 1982. The estimation of animal abundance and related parameters. Second edition. MacMillan Publishing, New York, New York. No
Thompson, W. L., G. C. White, and C. Gowan. 1998. Monitoring vertebrate populations. Academic Press, San Diego, California. No
White, G. C., D. R. Anderson, K. P. Burnham, and D. L. Otis. 1982. Capture-recapture and removal methods for sampling closed populations. Los Alamos National Laboratory, LA-8787-NERP, Los Alamos, New Mexico. No

Section 7. Abstract


The ability to detect an important trend in numbers of a fish population depends upon obtaining quality estimates of abundance and precision in a cost-efficient manner. Simply relying on a relative index, which is a count that has not been adjusted for undetected objects or individuals, may lead to misleading conclusions because of the unknown magnitude of the sampling bias. A common approach to estimating chinook samon populations is to use an index count of annual numbers of redds. The assumption is that these uncorrected counts represent a constant proportion of true numbers of redds across time, which is unlikely given the nonconstant detection rates of redds due to a myriad of environmental factors affecting their sightability. Further, an index count provides an single number with no measure of precision, i.e., it does not include sampling variation. Therefore, we propose a pilot study to evaluate the applicability, efficiency, and cost-effectiveness of a modified two-sample, Lincoln-Petersen mark-resight estimator for obtaining unbiased and precise abundance estimates of spring/summer chinook salmon redds in the Snake River drainage. If successful, this approach would provide a statistically rigorous means of monitoring salmonid populations by producing an unbiased (or nearly unbiased) estimate of redd nnumbers with a valid measure of precision.

Reviews and Recommendations

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

This project has not yet been reviewed

Return to top of page