FY 2007 Solicitation Homepage

Project Proposal Request for FY 2007 - FY 2009 Funding (Revised Summer 2006)

Proposal 199107300: Idaho Natural Production Monit

Download this document in MS Word format
Open this document in PDF format

Table of Contents
Part 1. Administration and Budgeting
Section 1: General Administrative
Section 2: Project Location
Section 3: Project Species
Section 4: Past Accomplishments
Section 5: Relationship to Other Projects
Section 6: Biological Objectives
Section 7: Work Elements
Section 8: Budget
Section 9: Project Future
Section 10: Documents
Part 2. Reviews
Part 1 of 2. Administration and Budgeting
Section 1: General Administrative Information
Process Information:
Date Proposal Submitted & Finalized Status Form Generator
July 14, 2006 Finalized Tim Copeland

Proposal Type: Ongoing
Proposal Number: 199107300
Proposal Name: Idaho Natural Production Monit
BPA Project Manager: Roy Beaty
Agency, Institution or Organization: Idaho Department of Fish & Game
Short Description: We propose to refine the description of population structure of spring/summer Chinook in Idaho, monitor juvenile production of Chinook/steelhead, evaluate survival/productivity of Chinook, and estimate annual abundance of Chinook redds in the upper Salmon
Information Transfer: All activities will be documented in annual narrative reports. Some portions will be presented at professional meetings and submitted for peer-reviewed publication. Data will be maintained in IDFG databases and will be made available through StreamNet.
 
Project Proposal Contacts
Contact Organization Address Phone/Email Roles Notes
Form Submitter
Tim Copeland Idaho Department of Fish & Game 1414 E Locust Ln
Nampa ID 83686
Ph: 208.465.8404
Fax: 208.465.8434
Email: tcopeland@idfg.idaho.gov
Form Submitter
All Assigned Contacts
Tim Copeland Idaho Department of Fish & Game 1414 E Locust Ln
Nampa ID 83686
Ph: 208.465.8404
Fax: 208.465.8434
Email: tcopeland@idfg.idaho.gov
Form Submitter
Jody White Idaho Department of Fish & Game 1414 E Locust Ln
Nampa ID 83686
Ph: 208-465-8404
Fax: 208-465-8434
Email: jodywhite@idfg.idaho.gov
Supervisor

Section 2: Project Location
Sponsor Province: Mountain Snake ARG Province: No Change
Sponsor Subbasin: Salmon ARG Subbasin: No Change
Location(s) at which the action will be implemented
Latitude Longitude Waterbody Location Description County/State Subbasin Primary?
455123 1164733 Salmon River sub-basin Lemhi, Custer, Valley, Idaho, Idaho Salmon Yes
462531 1170210 Clearwater sub-basin Idaho, Clearwater, Latah, Nez Perce, Lewis, Idaho Clearwater Yes

Section 3: Focal Species
Focal Species:
Primary Secondary Additional Species
Chinook Snake River Spring/Summer ESU
Steelhead Snake River ESU

Section 4: Past Accomplishments
Past Accomplishments for Each Fiscal Year of This Project
Fiscal Year Accomplishments
2005 Presented steelhead PIT tag data at national AFS meeting. Produced a stock-recruit model showing density-dependence in the freshwater productivity of the Snake River spring/summer Chinook salmon.
2004 Maintained and extended the General Parr Monitoring data base, showing trends in juvenile salmonid densities in Idaho 1985-2004. Placed over 16k PIT tags in juvenile steelhead from remote locations not accessible by conventional sampling since 2002.
2003 PIT tagged over 33k wild steelhead parr since 1999. Develop highly accurate age data (>97% accurate on known-age fish). Complete run reconstructions and estimate SAR for migratory years 1996-2000.
2002 Estimated parr densities and percent of carrying capacity since 1985. Steelhead densities decreased in 8 of 9 generations, chinook densities decreased in 8 of 10 generations.
2001 Begin development of a stock/recruit curve for natural production of spring/summer chinook smolts since brood year 1990. Use age data to reconstruct runs and estimate SARs for migratory years 1996-1999.
2000 Began aging Snake River spring and summer chinook salmon to improve run reconstruction analysis. PIT tag 6033 wild steelhead parr.
1999 Published Snake River spring and summer chinook salmon article in Fisheries. Developed a D-value calculation model. PIT tag 6528 wild steelhead parr.
1998 Completed model for estimating smolt-to-adult return rate by migration route.
1997 Identified decreased survival associated with multiple collection and bypass. Verified PATH chinook salmon smolt-to-adult recovery goals with Snake River basin smolts/female estimates.
1996 [Accomplishment field left blank]
1995 [Accomplishment field left blank]
1994 Documented adult chinook and steelhead escapement to three pristine wilderness streams during 1994-1996.
1993 Determined release strategies for hatchery chinook smolts and adults to increase survival and production.
1992 Identified differences in peak arrival time to Lower Granite dam between hatchery and wild chinook.
1991 [Accomplishment field left blank]
1990 [Accomplishment field left blank]
1989 Estimated seeding level for A-run and B-run steelhead in specific rearing areas.
1988 Identified factors affecting survival of chinook and steelhead parr, estimated chinook egg-to-parr survival in the headwaters of the Salmon River and Crooked River, and estimated survival impacts due to irrigation diversions.
1987 [Accomplishment field left blank]
1986 [Accomplishment field left blank]
1985 Documented the relative success of instream structures versus off-channel habitat development to increase parr production.
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.

Section 5: Relationships to Other Projects
Other Current Projects Related to this Project (any funding source)
Funding Source Related ID Related Project Title Relationship
Other: Idaho Power [no entry] Rapid River & Pahsimeroi hatcheries Coordinate field work. Collect salmon carcasses at hatchery weirs.
PCSRF - Idaho 014 04 SA Implement Salmon and Steelhead Technical support for plan development.
PCSRF - Idaho 015 04 SA Lemhi River Effectiveness Moni Supply technical expertise & planning. Share data.
Other: USFWS 14110-6-J008 IDFG LSRCP Hatchery O&M Coordinate field work. Collect salmon carcasses at hatchery weirs.
Other: USFWS 14110-6-J009 IDFG LSRCP Hatchery RM&E Share data.
BPA 198335003 Nez Perce Tribal Hatchery M&E Coordinate field work. Share data.
BPA 198712700 Smolt Monitoring By Non-Feder Share data.
BPA 198810804 Streamnet (CIS/NED) Share data.
BPA 198909800 Salmon Studies Id Rvrs IDFC Cooperate with planning & field work. Share data.
BPA 198909801 Salmon Studies Id Rvrs USFWS Cooperate with planning & field work. Share data.
BPA 198909802 Salmon Studies Id Rvrs NPT Cooperate with planning & field work. Share data.
BPA 198909803 Salmon Studies Id Rvrs SBT Cooperate with planning & field work. Share data.
BPA 199005500 Id Steelhead M&E Studies Cooperate with planning & field work. Share data.
BPA 199202604 Life Studies of Spring Chinook Coordinate field work.
BPA 199405000 Salmon River Habitat Enhance Cooperate with field work. Share data.
BPA 199604302 Johnson Cr Artificial Propagat Coordinate field work. Share data.
BPA 199700100 Idaho Chinook Salmon Captive R Coordinate field work. Share data.
BPA 199701501 Imnaha R Smolt Monitoring NPT Coordinate field work.
BPA 199703000 Listed Stock Adult Escapement Coordinate field work. Share data.
BPA 199800702 Gd Ronde Supp Lostine O&M/M&E Coordinate field work.
BPA 199902000 Analyze Persistence/Dynamics S Cooperate with field work. Share data.
Other: USFWS 200107 & 200109 Nez Perce LSRCP Hatchery RM&E Coordinate field work. Share data.
BPA 200204900 Eval Precision Bias Chinook Cooperate with field work. Share data.
BPA 200206200 Chinook Return Quantification Coordinate field work. Share data.
BPA 200301700 Integrated Status/Effect Progr Participate on Technical Oversight Committee for this project. Will cooperate in field work & share data.
BPA 200303600 CBFWA Monitor/Eval Program Participate on habitat work group of this project. Share data.
Other: PSC NA77FP0445 Salmon spawning ground surveys Cooperate with field work. Share data.

Section 6: Biological Objectives
Biological Objectives of this Proposed Project
Biological Objective Full Description Associated Subbasin Plan Strategy Page Nos
Decribe sp/su Chinook population structure The initial delineation of local population structure was developed by the ICBTRT (2003) based on incomplete data and several assumptions. As such, the delineations represent testable hypotheses regarding salmon biology and ecology. We propose to gather three types of relevant data at the population level: genetic diversity, morphological variation, and age-length data. Salmon 1A2, 1B4, 2A1 (Also Clearwater plan strategies A2 [p14], D4 [p21]) 20-23
Evaluate Chinook life cycle survival/productivity This is an evaluation that puts together and interprets data generated from other objectives in a form suitable for management evaluation. The results are invaluable for assessing stock status and the impact of tributary management actions on them. There are two components: estimate smolt-adult return rates and update a Beverton-Holt stock-recruit model. Salmon 1A2, 1B4, 3A2, 3C2, 3C3, 4A5 (also Clearwater plan strategies A2 [p14], D4 [p21]) 20-27
Monitor juvenile production of Chinook & steelhead Screw traps cannot be deployed everywhere in the Idaho wilderness. This objective is general trend monitoring that focuses on density of juvenile salmonids at selected sampling sites in the Clearwater and Salmon sub-basins. By incorporating probabilistic site selection, species distributions can be assessed, also. Statistical techniques developed by EPA personnel (EMAP program) have been promoted and are in increasing use across the basin. This element will improve the usefulness and relevance of data collected. There are two components to this objective. Salmon 3A1, 3C1, 4A5, 4B1, 4C1 (also Clearwater strategies B3, B4, B7, D4, E1, F4 [p18-23]) 25-28

Section 7: Work Elements
Work Elements and Associated Biological Objectives
Work Element Name Work Element Title Description Start Date End Date Estimated Budget
01: Produce Environmental Compliance Documentation Project Permitting Apply for all necessary ESA permits 7/1/2007 6/30/2010 $3,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Decribe sp/su Chinook population structure
No Metrics for this Work Element

02: Manage and Administer Projects Annual Project Planning Schedule and coordinate activities 7/1/2007 6/30/2010 $25,530
Biological Objectives Metrics
Decribe sp/su Chinook population structure
Evaluate Chinook life cycle survival/productivity
Monitor juvenile production of Chinook & steelhead
No Metrics for this Work Element

03: Produce Annual Report Annual Progress Report This element includes annual progress reports, quarterly status reports, and professional communications, such as presentations and publications. 7/1/2007 6/30/2010 $138,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Decribe sp/su Chinook population structure
Evaluate Chinook life cycle survival/productivity
Monitor juvenile production of Chinook & steelhead
No Metrics for this Work Element

04: Create/Manage/Maintain Database Data Management [Work Element Description Not Entered] 7/1/2007 6/30/2010 $97,050
Biological Objectives Metrics
Decribe sp/su Chinook population structure
Monitor juvenile production of Chinook & steelhead
No Metrics for this Work Element

05: Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data Collect Age Structure & Morphological Data [Work Element Description Not Entered] 7/1/2007 6/30/2010 $752,550
Biological Objectives Metrics
Decribe sp/su Chinook population structure
Primary R, M, and E Type: Status & trend monitoring
Secondary R, M, and E Type: Uncertainties research
Focal Area: Tributaries

06: Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data Genetic Population Analysis [Work Element Description Not Entered] 7/1/2007 6/30/2010 $113,670
Biological Objectives Metrics
Decribe sp/su Chinook population structure
Primary R, M, and E Type: Status and trend monitoring
Secondary R, M, and E Type: Uncertainties research
Focal Area: Tributaries

08: Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data General Parr Monitoring [Work Element Description Not Entered] 7/1/2007 6/30/2010 $1,117,050
Biological Objectives Metrics
Monitor juvenile production of Chinook & steelhead
Primary R, M, and E Type: Status and trend monitoring
Secondary R, M, and E Type: Action effectiveness research
Focal Area: Tributaries

09: Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data Stock-Recruit & SAR Analysis [Work Element Description Not Entered] 7/1/2007 6/30/2010 $25,380
Biological Objectives Metrics
Evaluate Chinook life cycle survival/productivity
Primary R, M, and E Type: Action effectiveness research
Secondary R, M, and E Type: Uncertainties research
Focal Area: Tributaries

10: Analyze/Interpret Data Project Data Analysis [Work Element Description Not Entered] 7/1/2007 6/30/2010 $81,690
Biological Objectives Metrics
Decribe sp/su Chinook population structure
Evaluate Chinook life cycle survival/productivity
Monitor juvenile production of Chinook & steelhead
Primary R, M, and E Type: Status and trend monitoring
Primary R, M, and E Type: Action effectiveness research
Secondary R, M, and E Type: Uncertainties research
Focal Area: Tributaries


Section 8: Budget

Itemized Estimated Budget
Item Note FY 2007 Cost FY 2008 Cost FY 2009 Cost
Personnel 51 mos of permanent employee time, 110 mos for temporaries $479,380 $479,380 $479,380
Supplies Supplies, vehicle costs, rent & utilities $81,700 $81,700 $81,700
Travel Airfare, lodging, per diem, camp groceries $54,380 $54,380 $54,380
Other Statistical consulting & miscellaneous expenses $33,000 $33,000 $33,000
Overhead [blank] $136,180 $136,180 $136,180
Totals $784,640 $784,640 $784,640

Total Estimated FY 2007-2009 Budgets
Total Itemized Budget$2,353,920
Total Work Element budget$2,353,920

Cost sharing
Funding Source or Organization Item or Service Provided FY 2007 Est Value ($) FY 2008 Est Value ($) FY 2009 Est Value ($) Cash or in-kind? Status
PCSRF Monitoring program $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 Cash Under Review
PSC Statewide redd surveys $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 Cash Confirmed
Totals $130,000 $130,000 $130,000

Section 9: Project Future
Project Future Costs and/or Termination
FY 2010 Est Budget FY 2011 Est Budget Comments
$784,640 $784,640 [Outyear comment field left blank]
Future Operations & Maintenance Costs
 
Termination Date Comments
 
Final Deliverables

Section 10: Narrative
Document Type Size Date
Fix-it Loop Documents
Documents Originally Submitted with this Proposal

Part 2 of 2. Reviews of Proposal
Administrative Review Group (ARG) Results
Account Type:
Expense
No changes were made to this proposal


NPCC Final Funding Recommendations (October 23, 2006) [Full NPCC Council Recs]

FY 2007 NPCC Rec
$784,650
FY 2008 NPCC Rec
$784,650
FY 2009 NPCC Rec
$784,650
Total NPCC Rec
$2,353,950
Budget Type:Expense
Budget Category:ProvinceExpense
Recommendation:Fund
NPCC Comments: ISRP fundable in part. Do not fund the genetic work component as per ISRP recommendation.


NPCC Draft Funding Recommendations (September 15, 2006) [Full NPCC Council Recs]

FY 2007 NPCC Rec
$784,650
FY 2008 NPCC Rec
$784,650
FY 2009 NPCC Rec
$784,650
Total NPCC Rec
$2,353,950
FY 2007 MSRT Rec
$ 0
FY 2008 MSRT Rec
$ 0
FY 2009 MSRT Rec
$ 0
Total MSRT Rec
$ 0
Budget Category:ProvinceExpense
NPCC Comments:
NPCC Staff Comments: ISRP fundable in part. Do not fund the genetic work component as per ISRP recommendation.

Local or MSRT Comments: task removed: probalistic redd surveys, Upper Salmon probalistic GPM, temp personell


Independent Scientific Review Panel Final Review (August 31, 2006) [Download full document]

Recommendation: Fundable in part
Comments: The sponsors responded to clarify the primary questions raised by the ISRP. The adequacy and depth of the clarification varied across the questions raised.

In response to the ISRP questions of whether the project could be scaled to provide only the data needed for regional RME needs, and how past uses of the data justify continuation, the sponsors provided a succinct and sufficient response. The ISRP recognizes that the Idaho Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation project has been instrumental in providing critical data for assessing the status and trends of salmonids (principally spring and summer Chinook) in the Salmon River subbasin.

The response provided by the sponsors clarified how their objectives relate to recovery planning in general. It is clear that valuable data has been generated and that the project has added value to these data in the past through appropriate analyses. The ISRP appreciates the perspective concerning the project changing due to information demanded by regional decision-makers.

In response to questions on the need for additional genetic and life history data on Chinook salmon, the sponsors respond, "The details of life history and genetic structure of Chinook salmon populations in Idaho are not well-known on the scales required for population-level recovery planning and monitoring. INPMEP should be the main source of this information for groups like the ICBTRT. Many of the population delineations made by the ICBTRT were made using professional judgment and not backed by hard data."

The ISRP recognizes that microsatellite and SNP genotypes are not available for all the spring and summer Chinook in the Snake River region. At the same time NOAA Fisheries and others have been using microsatellite genotyping to evaluate a number of salmon management problems in the Snake River system. Sponsors did not show how any of this new data had altered the understanding of Chinook salmon metapopulation structure and how additional data was essential to management decisions. It is not clear if this data would do little more than reinforce the existing understanding of population structure. While more data would almost always be useful, sponsors have not identified what management decisions hinge on the data. This should be made evident before undertaking further genotyping to define Chinook salmon metapopulations. The ISRP’s intent is that the management questions and the sponsors' methods and tasks to address them be made explicit. The purpose is to help ensure that the data collected is the most useful. Further explanation of the need for describing the fine-scale genetic structure of Chinook salmon in Idaho is necessary before this component of the project is justified.

The sponsors clarify that they are not involved in the investigation of hatchery effects on natural spawners and natural populations, but that data they collect on natural populations is used by projects that are conducting those investigations. This response is appreciated by the ISRP, and the importance of that effort is understood.

The sponsors’ clarification of objective 1) Describe the population structure of Snake River spring/summer Chinook salmon, and 4) Evaluate life cycle survival and the freshwater productivity/production of Snake River spring/summer Chinook salmon, were unconvincing. The ISRP comment on 1 is found in the paragraph above on genetic and life-history investigations. For objective 4, the primary purpose of engaging in life cycle survival estimation is to support tributary habitat restoration effectiveness monitoring. The proposal is insufficient to evaluate whether this is the suitable vehicle to accomplish that task. The proposal does not discuss tributary habitat restoration in the subbasin and provide a connection between this project and those efforts. The sponsors' clarification of objective 2 and 3, estimation of juvenile and adult abundance and distribution is sufficient.

Fundable in part to conduct the essential juvenile (parr and smolt) abundance data collections and the essential adult redd and age distribution information. The genetics work component is not scientifically justified in the proposal or response.


Independent Scientific Review Panel Preliminary Review (June 2, 2006) [Download full document]

Recommendation: Response requested
Comments: This project may have out-lived its usefulness. It needs better justification for its continuance at this level of activity. In response, please consider scaling down to provide only the data needed for regional RME needs. Please include in the response, how past performance justifies continuation of the project.

In response, please provide a clear description of need for the genetic and life-history aspects of the proposal, and within the context of what is already known, why it is important to fill the "gaps" that are perceived to exist. The authors argue that expanding data to describe genetic structuring of Chinook salmon in the Basin is important. This claim should arise from a detailed study of what problems would benefit from such an expansion, and from a thorough analysis to show that existing data do not meet the perceived need. In response, please describe the basis for concluding that presently available data do not meet the needs.

The project is fundable to get analysis of past data collections, but otherwise the proposal should be treated as a new project and reviewed as such. This project has been in existence for more than two decades. The abstract (details in text) should include what benefits have resulted and provide a strong basis for the project to be continued. The authors do describe a stock-recruit relationship that they have successfully developed, but there is no discussion of the significance of this potentially program-altering relationship for management of Chinook salmon.

A response is requested to provide details what specific objectives and goals are driving accumulation of these data.

On page 6, Table 1, the proposal is identified as contributing to identifying hatchery spawner relative to natural spawners, but no work elements support that contribution. Similarly "effects (hatchery) on natural populations and recovery contribution by hatcheries is identified, but work elements do not clearly link to those needs. In response, please clarify these apparent missing elements.

A major proposed new task is to incorporate and evaluate probabilistic sampling, a commendable effort. It would be done with available spawning habitat in the upper Salmon River, which seems less critical than testing population estimation. However, in response, please provide details of year-by-year plans and provide a firmly established completion date.

In response, please explain and clarify your objectives and the reasons for having them. Some objectives seem to be in the proposal as carryover from the past. Some tasks will help fine tune data management and run forecasting, for example. That’s nice but instead there could be a major thrust to identify and deal with the factors limiting salmon and steelhead quantity and quality.

One work element is to genotype the spring and summer Chinook at several microsatellite loci to corroborate the independent population status evaluations by the Interior Columbia Technical Recovery Team. Please show, in response, how duplication between this project and 198909600 Genetic Monitoring Snake River Chinook salmon and steelhead is to be prevented, and how these projects will be coordinated.

In response, please provide extensive background and justification for collecting more genetic diversity data, more life-history data, etc. Use of words such as "potentially useful" does not help to clarify the important reasons and need for these data.

Maintained by the Columbia Basin Fish & Wildlife Authority. Please direct comments or questions to the webmaster.