Return to Proposal Finder FY 2000 Proposal 199107300

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 Idaho Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation
BPA Project Proposal Number 199107300
Business name of agency, institution,
or organization requesting funding
Idaho Department of Fish and Game
Business acronym (if appropriate) IDFG
 

Proposal contact person or principal investigator

Name Doug Nemeth
Mailing Address 1414 E. Locust Lane
City, State, Zip Nampa, ID 83686
Phone 2084658404
Fax 2084658434
E-mail dnemeth@idfg.state.id.us
 
Manager of program authorizing this project
 
Review Cycle FY 2000
Province Mountain Snake
Subbasin Salmon
 
Short Description Improves adult-to-smolt and smolt-to-adult survival of chinook salmon and steelhead. Identifies limiting factors and methods to improve survival. Provides monitoring to determine the effectiveness of recovery actions and population status.
Target Species Snake River spring and summer chinook salmon and steelhead


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: 3.2, 3.2c, 4.1a, 4.2a, 4.3c.1, 5.0a, 5,0b, 5.0e, 5,0f.7, 7.1c, 7.1c.3
FWS/NMFS Biological Opinion Number(s) which this project addresses: 1995 NMFS Biological Opinion
Other Planning Document References Snake R. Salmon Recovery Plan, NMFS 1997, August 8, Draft


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

Year Accomplishment
1984 The general parr monitoring database was started in 1984 and continues today. It represents the most comprehensive salmon and steelhead database in Idaho and is the only longterm database for steelhead.
1985 Documented the relative success of instream structures versus off-channel habitat development to increase parr production.
1988 Increased chinook and steelhead parr production by over 135,000 fish following habitat improvements.
1988 Identified factors affecting survival of chinook and steelhead parr.
1988 Estimated chinook egg-to-parr survival in the headwaters of the Salmon River and Crooked River.
1988 Estimated chinook egg-to-parr survival of fish supplemented by different methods (e.g. adult outplants, fry releases, egg outplants).
1988 Estimated survival impacts due to irrigation diversions.
1989 Estimated seeding level for A-run and B-run steelhead in specific rearing areas.
1992 Identified differences in peak arrival time to Lower Granite dam between hatchery and wild chinook.
1993 Determined release strategies for hatchery chinook smolts and adults to increase survival and production.
1994 Documented adult chinook and steelhead escapement to three pristine wilderness streams during 1994-1996.
1997 Identified decreased survival associated with multiple collection and bypass.
1997 Verified PATH chinook salmon smolt-to-adult recovery goals with Snake River basin smolts/female estimates.
1998 Completed model for estimating smolt-to-adult return rate by migration route.


Section 3. Relationships to Other Projects

Project ID Title Description Umbrella
8909800 Idaho supplementation studies PIT tags chinook and steelhead used in smolt-to-adult return rate (SAR) analysis, collects samples from chinook carcasses for aging, estimates production, collects data for general parr monitoring sites No
8909802 Salmon supplementation studies PIT tags chinook and steelhead used in SAR analysis, collects samples from chinook carcasses for aging, estimates production and productivity for limiting factor analysis, collects data for general parr monitoring sites No
8909803 Salmon supplementation studies PIT tags chinook and steelhead used in SAR analysis, collects samples from chinook carcasses for aging, estimates production and productivity for limiting factor analysis, collects data for general parr monitoring sites No
8909801 Salmon supplementation studies PIT tags chinook and steelhead used in SAR analysis, collects samples from chinook carcasses for aging, estimates production and productivity for limiting factor analysis, collects data for general parr monitoring sites No
9005500 Steelhead supplementation studies PIT tags steelhead used in SAR analysis No
9064 Chinook salmon spatial habitat analysis Conducts salmon escapement monitoring which complements proposed work for increased escapement monitoring No
9102800 Monitoring smolt migration of wild Snake River spring/summer chinook PIT tags chinook used in SAR analysis No
5520800 Listed stock adult escapement monitoring Conducts salmon escapement monitoring which complements increased escapement monitoring No
9801002 Captive rearing initiative for Salmon R. chinook salmon, M&E The report on chinook population status will be used by project 9801002 to identify high risk populations that could potentially benefit from a captive program No
9303501 Red R. Watershed Restoration Project This project measures fish production and productivity in Red R. and as such is an integral monitoring component of the Red R. watershed restoration project. No
9600600 PATH- Facilitation, Tech. Assistance & Peer Review General parr monitoring and smolt-to-adult information produced by this project have been used in the PATH process No
9600800 PATH- Participation by State and Tribal Agencies General parr monitoring and smolt-to-adult information produced by this project have been used in the PATH process No
9700200 PATH- UW Technical Support General parr monitoring and smolt-to-adult information produced by this project have been used in the PATH process No


Section 4. Objectives, Tasks and Schedules

Objectives and Tasks

Objective Task
1. Produce chinook salmon smolts per female consistent with the Snake R. basin average (220 smolts/female) in all major watersheds of the Salmon River and Clearwater River basins. a. Synthesize information regarding population productivity, total smolt production, parr densities, and lifestage survival rates of spring and summer chinook in the Salmon and Clearwater River basins with information regarding habitat parameters obtained
1. . from appropriate agencies (e.g. BPA, USFS, BLM, IDEQ, etc.).
2. Achieve 2-6% smolt-to-adult suvival for chinook salmon and 3-7 % for steelhead in the Snake River basin. a. Continue estimating smolt-to-adult survival of Snake River spring and summer chinook salmon (as an aggregate) and steelhead by migration route (transported, bypassed, never collected) and overall survival.
2. b. PIT tag wild juvenile steelhead to increase the number of adult returns for the analysis in Task 2a.
2. c. Continue estimating smolts/female for aggregate Snake River basin spring and summer chinook salmon to identify smolt-to-adult survival needed to achieve recovery.
2. d. Continue reporting weekly smolt detection information for the entire Snake River basin during the spring outmigration to IDFG managers for recommending actions regarding hydrosystem operation.
3. Manage and collect long-term monitoring data on spring and summer chinook and steelhead population abundance and characteristics to document status and trend. a. Continue managing the general parr monitoring database which includes information on densities of sp/su chinook salmon juveniles, steelhead juveniles, resident fish juveniles, and habitat parameters throughout the Salmon and Clearwater River basins.
3. b. Investigate the need to expand general parr monitoring sites to integrate parr monitoring with escapement index areas
3. c. Expand sp/su chinook escapement monitoring to include all metapopulations identified in the NMFS recovery plan.
3. d. Determine the relationship between redds in index areas relative to redds in the entire drainage for key populations.
3. e. Continue indexing steelhead escapement in the Salmon and Clearwater River basins by conducting aerial redd counts.
3. f. Confirm age estimates of spring and summer chinook salmon from previous years if possible.
3. g. Utilize coded-wire-tagged hatchery adults from as many sites as possible and wild PIT tagged adults to develop an archive of aging structures as a means of validating age estimates.
3. h. Continue enumerating chinook and steelhead escapement over weirs and conducting redd counts.
3. i. PIT tag a minimum of 700 emigrating chinook parr during the summer and fall, and 500 emigrating smolts during the spring, annually. PIT tag all steelhead juveniles of sufficient size.
3. j. Continue monitoring chinook and steelhead parr densities in trend areas.

Objective Schedules and Costs

Objective Start Date End Date Measurable Biological Objectives Milestone FY 2000 Cost %
1 07/01/99 06/01/07 Produce chinook salmon smolts per female consistent with the Snake R. basin average (220 smolts/female) in all major watersheds of the Salmon River and Clearwater River basins. X 18.0%
2 07/01/96 Achieve 2-6% smolt-to-adult suvival for chinook salmon and 3-7 % for steelhead in the Snake River basin. 38.0%
3 Manage and collect long-term monitoring data on spring and summer chinook and steelhead population abundance and characteristics to document status and trend. 44.0%


Section 5. Estimated Budget Summary

Itemized Budget

Item Note FY 2000 Cost
Personnel $311,942
Fringe $112,299
Supplies $ 55,015
Operating $ 48,640
Capital $ 37,500
Travel $ 28,935
Indirect $133,181
Subcontractor $ 40,000
Total Itemized Budget $767,512


Total estimated budget

Total FY 2000 project cost $767,512
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA Funds $ 0
Total FY 2000 budget request $767,512
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

Not applicable
 

Outyear Budget Totals

2001 2002 2003 2004
All Phases $838,439 $871,977 $906,856 $943,130
Total Outyear Budgets $838,439 $871,977 $906,856 $943,130
 

Other Budget Explanation

Schedule Constraints: Completion of Objective 1 is dependent upon the nature of available data and the amount and kind of remedial work necessary. As such, the completion date of 6/2007 represents a rough estimate.


Section 6. References

Reference Watershed?
Baker, T., A. Wertheimer, R. Burkett, and seven others. 1996. Status of Pacific Salmon and Steelhead Escapements in Southeastern Alaska. Fisheries: Special Issue on Southeastern Alaska and British Columbia Salmonid Stocks at Risk. Vol 21, No 10. No
Barber, Willard E. and Gordon A. McFarlane. 1987. Evaluation of Three Techniques to Age Artic Char from Alaskan and Canadian Waters. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 116:874-881 No
Beamish, R. J. and G. A. McFarlane. 1983. The Forgotten Requirement for Age Validation in Fisheries Boilogy. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 112:735-743. No
Chilton, D. E. and H. T. Bilton . 1986. New Method for Ageing Chinook Salmon (Onchorhynchus tshawytscha) Using Dorsal Fin Rays, and Evidence of Its Validity. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science 43:1588-1594. No
Cramer, Steven P. and Doug Neeley. June 1993. Revaluation of Delisting Criteria and Rebuilding schedules for Snake River Spring/Summer Chinook and Sockeye Salmon. Recovery Issues for Threatened and Endangered Snake River Salmon Technical Report 10 of 1 No
Ebel, W. 1977. Columbia River salmon and steelhead. In: E. Schwiebert, ed. Proceedings of a Symposium, Vancouver, Washington, March 5 1976-March 6 1976. No
Elms-Cockrum, Terry J. May 1997. Salmon Spawning Ground Surveys, 1996. Pacific Salmon Treaty Program. Annual Report. Idaho Department of Fish and Game. IDFG 97-25. No
English, K. K., Bocking, R. C. and J. R. Irvine. 1992. A Robust Procedure for Estimating Salmon Escapement Based on the Area-Under-the-Curve Method. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences. 49:1982-1989. No
Gerrodette, T. 1987. A power analysis for detecting trends. Ecology. 68:1364-1372. No
Hall, D.L. 1991. Age Validation and Aging Methods for Stunted Brook Trout. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 120:644-649. No
Hall-Griswold, J.A., E.J. Leitzinger, and C. Petrosky. 1995. Idaho Habitat/Natural Production Monitoring, Part I, General Monitoring Subproject. Ann. Rept. FY 1994. No
Hall-Griswold, J.A. and C. Petrosky. 1996. Idaho Habitat/Natural Production Monitoring, Part I. Ann. Rept. FY 1995. No
Hill, Ryan A. 1997. Optimizing Aerial count Frequency for the Area-Under-the Curve Method of Estimating Escapement. North American Journal for Fisheries Management. 17:461-466. No
Holubetz, T.B., 1995. Wild Steelhead Studies. FY 1993. No
Idaho Department of Fish and Game. 1990. Idaho Habitat Evaluation for Offsite Mitigation Record. Ann. Rept. FY 1988. No
Idaho Department of Fish and Game. 1991. Idaho Habitat Evaluation for Offsite Mitigation Record. Ann. Rept. FY 1989. No
Kiefer, R. and K. Forster. 1991. Idaho Habitat and Natural Production Monitoring. Ann. Rept. FY 1989. No
Kiefer, R. and K. Forster. 1992. Idaho Habitat and Natural Production Monitoring, Part II. Ann. Rept. FY 1990. No
Kiefer, R. and J. Lockhart. 1994. Intensive Evaluation and Monitoring of Chinook Salmon and Steelhead Trout Production, Crooked River and Upper Salmon River Sites. Ann. Rept. FY 1992. No
Kiefer, R. and J. Lockhart. 1997. Intensive Evaluation and Monitoring of Chinook Salmon and Steelhead Trout Production, Crooked River and Upper Salmon River Sites. Ann. Rept. FY 1994. No
Leitzinger, E.J. and C. Petrosky. 1995. Idaho Habitat/Natural Production Monitoring, Part I. Ann. Rept. FY 1993. No
Leitzinger, E., K.Plaster, P. Hassemer, P. Sankovich. 1996. Idaho Supplementation Studies. Annual Report 1993. Project number 89-098, DE-BI79-89BP01466, Bonneville Power Administration, Portland, Oregon. No
Link, W. and J. Hatfield. 1990. Power calculations and model selection for trend analysis: a comment. Ecology. 71: 1217-1220. No
Marshall, A. 1992. Genetic analysis of 1991 Idaho chinook salmon baseline collections. Attachment B. in Leitzinger, E., K. Plaster, and E. Bowles. 1993. Idaho supplementation studies. Annual Report 1991-92. DOE-89-098, BPA, Portland, OR. No
Mundy, P. R., D. Neeley, C. R. Steward, and seven others. 1994. Transportation of juvenile salmonids from hydroelectric projects in the Columbia River basin; An independent peer review. Final Report. USFWS, Portland, OR. No
National Marine Fisheries Service. Reinitiation of consultation on 1994-1998 operation of the federal Columbia River power system and juvenile transportation program in 1995 and future years. Signed: March 2, 1995. No
Nemeth, D., K. Plaster, K. Apperson, J. Brostrum, T. Curet, E. Brown. 1996. Idaho Supplementation Studies. Annual Report 1994. Project number 89-098, DE-BI79-89BP01466, Bonneville Power Administration, Portland, Oregon. No
Northwest Power Planning Council. 1986. Columbia River basin fishery planning model, technical discussion paper. No
Park, D. 1985. A review of smolt transportation to by pass dams on the Snake and Columbia Rivers. In U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Walla Walla district. Comprehensive report of juvenile salmonid transportation. Portland, OR. No
Petrosky, C.E. and T.B. Holubetz. 1985. Idaho Habitat Evaluation for Offsite Mitigation Record. Ann. Rept. FY 1984. No
Petrosky, C.E. and T.B. Holubetz. 1986. Idaho Habitat Evaluation for Offsite Mitigation Record. Ann. Rept. FY 1985. No
Petrosky, C.E. and T.B. Holubetz. 1987. Evaluation and Monitoring of Idaho Habitat Enhancement and Anadromous Fish Natural Production. Ann. Rept. FY 1986. No
Petrosky, C.E., T.B. Holubetz, and L.B. Everson. 1988. Idaho Habitat Evaluation for Offsite Mitigation Record. Ann. Rept. FY 1987. No
Platts, W., R. Torquemada, M. McHenry, and C. Graham. 1989. Changes in Salmon Spawning and Rearing Habitat from Increased Deliver of Fine Sediment to the South Fork Salmon River, Idaho. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 118:274-283. No
Rich, B.A., R. Scully, and C. Petrosky. 1992. Idaho Habitat/Natural Production Monitoring, Part I, General Monitoring Subproject. Ann. Rept. FY 1990. No
Rich, B.A., W. Schrader, and C. Petrosky. 1993. Idaho Habitat/Natural Production Monitoring, Part I, General Monitoring Subproject. Ann. Rept. FY 1991. No
Rich, B.A.and C. Petrosky. 1994. Idaho Habitat/Natural Production Monitoring, Part I, General Monitoring Subproject. Ann. Rept. FY 1992. No
Rieman, B. and J. McIntyre. 1996. Spatial and temporal variability in bull trout red counts.North American Journal of Fisheries Management, v. 16: 132-141. No
Skalski, J. 1990. A design for long-term status and trends monitoring. J. of Environmental Management. 30:139-144. No
Thedinga, J., M. Murphy, S. Johnson, J. Lorenz, and K. Koski. 1994. Determination of salmonid smolt yield with rotary-screw traps in the Situk River, Alaska, to predict effects of glacial flooding. No. Amer. J. of Fish. Mgt., v. 14: 837-851. No
Ward, D. L., R.R. Boyce, F.R. Young, and others, 1997. A review and assessment of transportation studies for juvenile chinook salmon in the Snake River: North American Journal of Fisheries Management, v. 17, p. 652-662. No


Section 7. Abstract

Abstract


Reviews and Recommendations

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

ISRP Preliminary Review , ISRP 99-2 Recommendation:
Delay Funding
Date:
Jun 15, 1999
[There are no budget numbers associated with this review.]
Comment:
Recommendation: Delay funding until the project is subjected to comprehensive independent peer review. There is a clear programmatic need for monitoring and evaluation of supplementation efforts, but this project provides little evidence that the job is getting done.

Comments: This is an ongoing study that is too huge, amorphous, and multi-faceted to inspire confidence in the reviewers in the project's future success or the competence of the project personnel. It is really a multi-project program. Separate proposals for each major component are needed to make the objectives clear and to enable evaluation. As it stands, the proposal is confused and has problems with logic of presentation. There is a lot of detailed background in the literature related to each of the proposal's objectives. The proposal should put these into context and interpret their findings.

This project builds quantified targets into its objectives, but the tasks are not directly aligned with achieving these objectives for objectives 1 and 2. For example, in Objective 2, tasks are a series of "continue to" activities. Have the conduct of these activities in the past led to increased survival? If not, what is the justification of continuing the same activities? There is not much explanation for a large budget.

The proposal mixes statements of method into the technical background and objectives. For example, the "products" of objectives are often stated as procedures. Therefore, the project's objectives have to some extent become the performance of methods rather than the attainment of biological results. Success of the project depends on several assumptions, some of which could be tested. Perhaps the study would be better served if its scope were reduced and some to these assumptions tested.

Other problems with the proposal include: (1) Past activities described for the "project" are not consistent with the project title. (2) The project history states the types (subject categories) of past findings but not what was found, i.e., no real information. (3) In the methods section, the discussion of aging seems problematic.

There is some discussion of the NMFS's specification of 12 metapopulations. If the monitoring is to assess the relative condition of each metapopulation, there should be some analysis of the number of sub-populations needed to represent the metapopulation. Further, given the high variability in data from monitoring salmonid populations there should be some analysis (statistical) demonstrating that the sites chosen will provide the data necessary to make management decisions.


CBFWA Funding Recommendation Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Aug 20, 1999
2000
$768,000
Comment:

CBFWA: Nonwatershed Technical Group Comments Recommendation:
Date:
Aug 20, 1999
[There are no budget numbers associated with this review.]
Comment:
Technical Criteria 1: Met? Yes -

Programmatic Criteria 2: Met? No - Tasks do not address Objectives 1 & 2

Milestone Criteria 3: Met? Yes -

Resource Criteria 4: Met? Yes -


CBFWA: Subregional Team Comments Recommendation:
Date:
Aug 20, 1999
[There are no budget numbers associated with this review.]
Comment:
This project is important and should continue. We recommend funding in order achieve management objectives in this region.

ISRP Final Review , ISRP 99-4 Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Oct 29, 1999
[There are no budget numbers associated with this review.]
Comment:
Fund. The response was excellent and makes it much clearer what the project is about, what is taking place in it, what has been accomplished, and where it is going. The response creates confidence in the capability of the project team. Parts of it could serve as a model for future proposals.

However, the project still needs to undergo a programmatic review. The project should be further assessed by independent reviewers to ensure its components form a coherent package consistent with the program goal. The review should ensure that all components are progressing via sound science. Reviewers trust that all parties involved in the project (including the Council and independent biometricians) are discussing the variability of estimated SARs and have an appreciation of the number of years of monitoring that may be required to come up with usable results.


NWPPC Funding Recommendation Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Nov 8, 1999
[There are no budget numbers associated with this review.]
Comment:

NWPPC Funding Recommendation , NWPPC 2000-6 Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Mar 1, 2000
2000
$767,512
Comment:
[Decision made in 11-3-99 Council Meeting]

NW Power and Conservation Council's FY 2006 Project Funding Review Funding category:
expense
Date:
May 2005
FY05 NPCC Start of Year:
$884,640
FY06 NPCC Staff Preliminary:
$884,640
FY06 NPCC July Draft Start of Year:
$884,640
Sponsor (IDFG) Comments (Go to Original on NPCC Website):

Return to top of page