BPA Fish and Wildlife FY 1998 Proposal

Section 1. Summary
Section 2. Goals
Section 3. Background
Section 4. Purpose and methods
Section 5. Planned activities
Section 6. Outcomes, monitoring and evaluation
Section 7. Relationships
Section 8. Costs and FTE

see CBFWA and BPA funding recommendations

Section 1. Summary

Title of project
Pit Tag Purchases Lower Snake River Compensation Plan Monitoring and Evaluation Programs

BPA project number   9701800

Short description
Allows an assessment of juvenile emigration timing, duration, and survival of hatchery and naturally-produced juveniles (under various flow regimes) in waters receiving compensation under the LSRCP.

Business name of agency, institution or organization requesting funding
Lower Snake River Compensation Plan Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Proposal contact person or principal investigator
 NameDaniel M. Herrig, Assistant Coordinator
 Mailing addressLSRCP Office, So. Vinnell Way, Rm 343
Boise, ID 83709
 Phone208-378-5321
 Emaildan_herrig@mail.fws.gov
   

Sub-contractors
None will receive funding; however those who will receive the tags include the LSRCP cooperators: Oregon Dept. of Fish and Wildlife, Washington Dept. of Fish and Wildlife, Idaho Dept. of Fish and Game, Nez Perce Tribe, Confederated Umatilla Tribes, and Fish and Wildlife Service

Section 2. Goals

General
Adaptive management (research or M&E)

Target stockLife stageMgmt code (see below)
Tucannon River chinookJuvenileS, (L), W
Tucannon River steelheadJuvenileA, (P)
Grande Ronde steelheadJuvenileA, (P)
Grande Ronde chinookJuvenileA, (L)
Imnaha chinookJuvenileS, (L), W
Imnaha steelheadJuvenileA, (P)
Clearwater steelheadJuvenileA, (P)
Clearwater chinookJuvenileA, E
Salmon River chinookJuvenileS, (L), W
Salmon River steelheadJuvenileA, (P)

 

Section 3. Background

Stream area affected

Hydro project   Four Lower Snake River Dams
Project is an office site only   X

History
Since the initiation of the LSRCP's involvement in the PIT-tagging program, LSRCP-related PIT tags have been provided by BPA through PSMFC because the LSRCP Program costs are reimbursed to the U.S. Treasury. Providing the PIT tags directly saved the administrative costs associated with the LSRCP program purchasing the tags.

Biological results achieved
Estimates of juvenile migration timing, duration, and survival under various flow regimes have been provided for hatchery-reared chinook and steelhead released from LSRCP facilities both for monitoring and for a variety of evaluation studies. Additionally, several natural populations have been monitored that inhabit streams affected by the LSRCP Program.

Project reports and papers
A list of LSRCP reports can be obtained from the LSRCP Office; they are numerous.

Adaptive management implications
Knowledge of juvenile survival has allowed the programs cooperators to select the best time, location, and type of release for improved emigration survival and helped reduce the likelihood of adverse impacts on naturally-produced fish. Flow managers will also use data to determine flows which provide optimum survival.

Section 4. Purpose and methods

Specific measureable objectives
Provide PIT-tags at an economical cost to cooperators so they can estimate juvenile LSRCP facility-reared steelhead and chinook emigration timing, migration, and survival from the point of release through the dams with detectors. PIT tags are used both as a monitoring devise for standard release protocols and as an evaluation tool for controlled experiments. Some natural populations are also monitored for comparisons to hatchery-reared fish.

Critical uncertainties
PIT tags use is not new; and although their use presents some risk to the marked fish, they have much lower mortality rates than alternative methods.

Biological need
Data are lacking which describe migration and survival characteristics of most populations of migrating juveniles. Most populations of Snake River chinook and many steelhead populations, both natural and hatchery-reared, have experienced poor migratory corridor survival in most years since the LSRCP Program was initiated in the early 1980's. Several LSRCP-affected chinook populations are now listed, and theLSRCP program is incorporating conservation programs to maintain many of these populations. Many hatcheries are now rear and release listed fish and some hatchery populations are part of an ESU. Although survival has improved in those years with higher springs flows, listed populations remain at low levels and hatchery populations are barely replacing themselves in most years.

Hypothesis to be tested
The hypotheses vary greatly among projects but generally include analysis of differences in migration timing, duration, or survival anticipated with various release locations, times, or types under various flow regimes. Some comparisons of stocks and type of rearing (e.g. natural versus hatchery) are also investigated.

Alternative approaches
Cold branding was used before PIT tags became the preferred tool but have not been considered for recent studies.

Methods
The experimental designs vary depending on the method and objectives of the individual monitoring or evaluation programs. Numbers of fish tagged varies based on the history of tag interrogations, i.e. the historical interrogation rates will help determine the number of tags needed to obtain a suitable number of recoveries for statistical studies (often 35 to 50 per test group).

Section 5. Planned activities

Phase O&MStart 1998 End 2002Subcontractor
Purchase PIT tags for LSRCP monitoring and evaluation programs
Project completion date   variable but long term

Section 6. Outcomes, monitoring and evaluation

SUMMARY OF EXPECTED OUTCOMES

Information products
Knowledge of juvenile migration timing, duration, and survival of a most hatchery and some natural-reared fish populations. Factors such as time, location, and type of release, as well as migration conditions and origin of stock, can be compared.

MONITORING APPROACH
Results should influence time, location, and type of release and influence stock selection which should result in better early survival of releases.

Provisions to monitor population status or habitat quality
All LSRCP projects have extensive monitoring and evaluation programs which are ongoing and require PIT tags as an evaluation tool.

Data analysis and evaluation
PIT-tag data will be incorporated into the analyses of programs by the study leaders conducting LSRCP-funded studies

Information feed back to management decisions
All LSRCP projects are conducted by co-managers and findings are applied as they become available and are agreed to by co-managers.

Evaluation
N/A

Incorporating new information regarding uncertainties
N/A

Section 7. Relationships

Related BPA projectRelationship
9801001 Grande Ronde Basin Spring Chinook Captive Broodstock Program Operation and Maintenance, Monitoring and Evaluation, and Fish Health Monitoring LSRCP provides facilities/fish
9801002 Monitoring and Evaluation for Captive Rearing Initiative for Salmon River Chinook Salmon LSRCP provides facilities/fish
9801003 Monitoring and Evaluation of Yearling Snake River Fall Chinook Salmon Outplanted Upstream of Lower Granite Dam LSRCP provides facilities/fish
9801004 LSRCP provides facilities/fish
9801005 LSRCP provides facilities/fish
9801006 LSRCP provides facilities/fish
9801007 LSRCP provides facilities/fish
8805302 Ne Oregon Hatchery - Grande Ronde Satellite Facilities LSRCP provides facilities/fish
5514000 Salmon River Production Program LSRCP provides facilities/fish
5503300 LSRCP provides facilities/fish

Opportunities for cooperation
Yes, this is now occurring among three state agencies and two tribes funded by LSRCP Program.

Section 8. Costs and FTE

Future funding needs   Past obligations (incl. 1997 if done)
FY$ Need% Plan % Implement% O and M
1998168,200     
1999181,830     
2000183,570     
2001179,510     
2002179,510     
 
Longer term costs   The costs are expected to be similar to those of 2002 in future years.
FY97 overhead percent   $0
Contractor FTE   none
Subcontractor FTE   none