FY 2007 Solicitation Homepage

Project Proposal Request for FY 2007 - FY 2009 Funding

Proposal 199801004: Monitor and Evaluate Performance of Juvenile Snake River Fall Chinook Salmon from Fall Chinook Acclimation Facilities

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
January 10, 2006 Finalized Jay Hesse
DB Administrator's Note [Changed Primary contact from S. Rocklage to J. Hesse upon request of B. Michaels, NPT due to staffing changes. 7/13/2006. DBA]

Proposal Type: Ongoing
Proposal Number: 199801004
Proposal Name: Monitor and Evaluate Performance of Juvenile Snake River Fall Chinook Salmon from Fall Chinook Acclimation Facilities
BPA Project Manager: Deborah Docherty
Agency, Institution or Organization: Nez Perce Tribe
Short Description: Monitor post-release performance and survival of yearling and subyearling fall Chinook from the Fall Chinook Acclimation Project (FCAP) facilities to evaluate success of the fall Chinook supplementation program above Lower Granite Dam.
Information Transfer: PIT tag information will be uploaded to the PTAGIS database managed by the PSMFC. Coded wire tag data will be entered into RMIS. We will produce annual FCAP release summary reports. This project will produce annual reports covering all activities. We will also produce in-season updates and end of season fall Chinook spawning ground survey reports to be distributed to co-managers. We will submit quarterly progress reports to BPA in Pisces. We will produce annual reports, journal manuscripts and give oral presentations of our study to compare acclimated and direct subyearling releases. The Department takes seriously the need to make primary data and meta data available within the region (ISRP 2005). This project will result in the collection of extremely valuable data given society’s monetary investment and the important management questions to be answered. Hence, the volume and complexity of information gathered through the monitoring and evaluation activities will need to be compiled and organized in a systematic manner. It will involve archiving monitoring data, integrating data from different co-manager M&E activities, and making the data accessible in local and regional databases. For these reasons it is imperative that data management receive careful attention. In addition to annual reports posted to the BPA website, we will utilize project specific and region-wide databases that have been developed to centralize data associated with widely used data collection activities and standardized performance measures. The Nez Perce Tribe website (www.nezperce.org/~dfrm/research) will house a standardized database for primary data, description of meta-data, and summary/annual reports related to this project. Appropriate components of program data and results will be provided to the following websites: Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission (PSMFC), including: PIT Tag Information System (PTAGIS), and the Regional Mark Information System (RMIS); StreamNet, CSMEP, and Northwest Environmental Data Network (NED; when functional). The Tribe currently is coordinating with the Columbia River InterTribal Fish Commission to seek additional Streamnet funds which would be dedicated for the Nez Perce Tribe to make project data more readily available. Publication of a data summary for all standardized performance measures will be provided every 5 years.
 
Project Proposal Contacts
Contact Organization Address Phone/Email Roles Notes
Form Submitter
Jay Hesse Nez Perce Tribe PO Box 365
Lapwai, ID, 83540
Ph: 208.843.7145
Fax: 208.843.9184
Email: jayh@nezperce.org
Form Submitter
All Assigned Contacts
Arleen Henry Nez Perce Tribe PO Box 365
Lapwai, ID 83540
Ph: 208-843-7317
Fax: 208-843-7319
Email: arleenh@nezperce.org
Administrative Contact
NPT Finance Department accountant
Steve Rocklage Nez Perce Tribe PO Box 365
Lapwai, ID 83540
Ph: 208.843.7145
Fax: 208.476.0719
Email: stever_BAK@nezperce.org
Project Lead

Section 2: Project Location
Sponsor Province: Blue Mountain ARG Province: No Change
Sponsor Subbasin: Snake Hells Canyon ARG Subbasin: No Change
Location(s) at which the action will be implemented
Latitude Longitude Waterbody Location Description County/State Subbasin Primary?
Clearwater River Clearwater River , Idaho Clearwater Yes
Grande Ronde River Grande Ronde River from mouth upstream to Wildcat Bridge , Washington Grande Ronde Yes
Imnaha River Imnaha River from mouth upstream to town of Imnaha , Oregon Imnaha Yes
Salmon River Salmon River from mouth upstream to French Creek , Idaho Salmon Yes
Snake River Snake River from Lewiston to Hell's Canyon Dam , Idaho Snake Hells Canyon Yes

Section 3: Focal Species
Focal Species:
Primary Secondary Additional Species
Chinook Snake River Fall ESU

Section 4: Past Accomplishments
Past Accomplishments for Each Fiscal Year of This Project
Fiscal Year Accomplishments
2005 Estimated post-release survival and documented migration characteristics of yearling fall Chinook from the FCAP facilities. Documented fish health. Redd counts on Grande Ronde, Imnaha and Salmon Rivers. Annual report will be published in 2006.
2004 Estimated post-release survival and documented migration characteristics of yearling fall Chinook from the FCAP facilities. Documented fish health. Redd counts on Grande Ronde, Imnaha and Salmon Rivers. Annual report published on BPA website.
2003 Estimated post-release survival and documented migration characteristics of yearling fall Chinook from the FCAP facilities. Documented fish health. Redd counts on Grande Ronde, Imnaha and Salmon Rivers. Annual report published on BPA website.
2002 Estimated post-release survival and documented migration characteristics of yearling fall Chinook from the FCAP facilities. Documented fish health. Assisted monitoring adult spawning distribution. Annual report published on BPA website.
2001 Estimated post-release survival and documented migration characteristics of yearling fall Chinook from the FCAP facilities. Documented fish health. Assisted monitoring adult spawning distribution. Annual report published on BPA website.
2000 Estimated post-release survival and documented migration characteristics of yearling fall Chinook from the FCAP facilities. Documented fish health. Assisted monitoring adult spawning distribution. Annual report published on BPA website.
1999 Estimated post-release survival and documented migration characteristics of yearling fall Chinook from the FCAP facilities. Documented fish health. Assisted monitoring adult spawning distribution. Annual report published on BPA website.
1998 Estimated post-release survival and documented migration characteristics of yearling fall Chinook from the FCAP facilities. Documented fish health. Assisted monitoring adult spawning distribution. Annual report published on BPA website.

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 Company [no entry] [Related Project Title left blank] We work cooperatively in a comprehensive effort to quantify fall Chinook salmon redd abundance and distribution above Lower Granite Dam.
BPA [no entry] Big Canyon Fall Chinook Project 199801005 is O&M of the Pittsburg Landing acclimation facility. This project monitors performance of fall Chinook salmon released from the Big Canyon acclimation facility to evaluate supplementation program success.
BPA 198335003 Nez Perce Tribal Hatchery M&E We share personnel and resources with the fall Chinook component of this project. We work cooperatively to mark/tag juvenile fall Chinook. We work cooperatively in a comprehensive effort to quantify fall Chinook salmon redd abundance and distribution above Lower Granite Dam.
BPA 199102900 Post-Release Survival of Fall We cooperate with this project to conduct a study to compare acclimated and direct-stream releases of subyearling hatchery fall chinook salmon.
BPA 199801003 M&E Yearling Snake R. Fall Ch We assisted this project in monitoring fall Chinook adult spawning fidelity and distribution from 1997-2001. We work cooperatively in a comprehensive effort to quantify fall Chinook salmon redd abundance and distribution above Lower Granite Dam.
BPA 199801005 Pittsburg Landing Fall Chinook Project 199801005 is O&M of the Pittsburg Landing acclimation facility. This project monitors performance of fall Chinook salmon released from the Pittsburg Landing acclimation facility to evaluate supplementation program success.
BPA 199801007 Capt J Rapids Chin Acclimation Project 199801005 is O&M of the Pittsburg Landing acclimation facility. This project monitors performance of fall Chinook salmon released from the Captain John Rapids acclimation facility to evaluate supplementation program success.
BPA 200203200 Fall Chin Passage Lower Granit We will work in cooperation with project 200203200 to examine the rate at which FCAP subyearlings holdover in lower Snake and Columbia River reservoirs and complete migration as yearlings.
BPA 200206000 Nez Perce Harvest Monitoring The Nez Perce Harvest Monitoring Project (BPA #200206000) monitors anadromous fisheries conducted by the Nez Perce Tribe. Primary focal species are Snake River spring/summer/ fall Chinook salmon ESA, and steelhead ESU to implement on the ground harvest monitoring in the Clearwater Subbasin, Salmon Subbasin, Imnaha Subbasin, Grande Ronde Subbasin, Tucannon Subbasin, Columbia River Zone 6. Quantification of harvest is essential for tributary run reconstruction and evaluation of the effectiveness of supplementation.
Other: USFWS WDFW Lower Snake River Compensation Plan We work in close cooperation with the WDFW Snake River Lab in Dayton, WA to coordinate marking/tagging, tag retention sampling, and numerous other fall Chinook supplementation activities, reporting and management needs.

Section 6: Biological Objectives
Biological Objectives of this Proposed Project
Biological Objective Full Description Associated Subbasin Plan Strategy Page Nos
Compare direct-stream and acclimated releases. Quantify and compare direct-stream and acclimated subyearling release group survival, travel time, passage timing, growth and condition at Lower Granite Dam. Quantify and compare direct-stream and acclimated subyearling release group SARs to Lower Granite Dam. Quantify and compare direct-stream and acclimated subyearling release group spawner fidelity to the Snake River. Snake Hells Canyon 2A7 Maximize natural and artificial production effectiveness, 2A8 Monitor effectiveness of artificial and natural production strategies, 2A9 Monitor effects of limiting factors, 2A7 develop knowledge of wild-hatchery interaction 18-19
Compare direct-stream and acclimated releases. Quantify and compare direct-stream and acclimated subyearling release group survival, travel time, passage timing, growth and condition at Lower Granite Dam. Quantify and compare direct-stream and acclimated subyearling release group SARs to Lower Granite Dam. Quantify and compare direct-stream and acclimated subyearling release group spawner fidelity to the Snake River. Clearwater 3B3 Increase hatchery effectiveness, 1A1 Conduct research within the context of identifying management versus basin-wide environmental effects. 14, 19
Manage project, coordinate and communicate Statement of work, budgets, spending plans, inventories, environmental compliance, accrual reporting, inter/intra-agency coordination, workshops, meetings, training, summary reports, Pisces status reports, annual reports, provencial review package preparation, and new proposal preparation and submittal. Snake Hells Canyon 2A2 utilize existing forums to enhance communication and coordination. From discussion: Local participation in province and basinwide planning and management will ensure coordination 18
Manage project, coordinate and communicate Statement of work, budgets, spending plans, inventories, environmental compliance, accrual reporting, inter/intra-agency coordination, workshops, meetings, training, summary reports, Pisces status reports, annual reports, provencial review package preparation, and new proposal preparation and submittal. Clearwater 3B1 Increase communication and coordination 19
Monitor and report fish health. Monitor status and trend and report health data (collected by Idaho Fish Health Lab) of all FCAP release groups at time of release. Clearwater 3B3 Increase hatchery effectiveness 19
Monitor and report fish health. Monitor status and trend and report health data (collected by Idaho Fish Health Lab) of all FCAP release groups at time of release. Snake Hells Canyon 2A7 Maximize natural and artificial production effectiveness in the subbasin, 2A8 Monitor and evaluate effectiveness of implementation of artificial and natural production strategies 18
Quantify adult abundance, distribution and SARs. Quantify status and monitor trend of adult abundance at Lower Granite Dam for each release group from the Pittsburg Landing, Big Canyon Creek, and Captain John Rapids acclimation facilities. Quantify status, monitor trend and document the distribution of fall Chinook salmon redds in the Grande Ronde, Imnaha and Salmon Rivers. Quantify status and monitor trend of SARs at Lower Granite Dam for each release group from the Pittsburg Landing, Big Canyon Creek, and Captain John Rapids acclimation facilities. Snake Hells Canyon 2A7 Maximize natural and artificial production effectiveness, 2A8 Monitor effectiveness of artificial and natural production strategies, 2A9 Monitor effects of limiting factors, 2A7 develop knowledge of wild-hatchery interaction 18-19
Quantify adult abundance, distribution and SARs. Quantify status and monitor trend of adult abundance at Lower Granite Dam for each release group from the Pittsburg Landing, Big Canyon Creek, and Captain John Rapids acclimation facilities. Quantify status, monitor trend and document the distribution of fall Chinook salmon redds in the Grande Ronde, Imnaha and Salmon Rivers. Quantify status and monitor trend of SARs at Lower Granite Dam for each release group from the Pittsburg Landing, Big Canyon Creek, and Captain John Rapids acclimation facilities. Grande Ronde Management Objective 1: Monitoring and Evaluation Objectives 1b and 1c, describe status and trends in adult abundance and productivity and monitor focal species spawning distributions in the Grande Ronde subbasin 276-277
Quantify adult abundance, distribution and SARs. Quantify status and monitor trend of adult abundance at Lower Granite Dam for each release group from the Pittsburg Landing, Big Canyon Creek, and Captain John Rapids acclimation facilities. Quantify status, monitor trend and document the distribution of fall Chinook salmon redds in the Grande Ronde, Imnaha and Salmon Rivers. Quantify status and monitor trend of SARs at Lower Granite Dam for each release group from the Pittsburg Landing, Big Canyon Creek, and Captain John Rapids acclimation facilities. Imnaha Strategy 1A2 (page 18), which states to continue annual monitoring of escapement into the subbasin. Strategy 4A2 (page 23) of the Aquatic Objectives calls for evaluation of Imnaha subbasin-specific adult abundance, life history characteristics, and spawn 18, 23
Quantify adult abundance, distribution and SARs. Quantify status and monitor trend of adult abundance at Lower Granite Dam for each release group from the Pittsburg Landing, Big Canyon Creek, and Captain John Rapids acclimation facilities. Quantify status, monitor trend and document the distribution of fall Chinook salmon redds in the Grande Ronde, Imnaha and Salmon Rivers. Quantify status and monitor trend of SARs at Lower Granite Dam for each release group from the Pittsburg Landing, Big Canyon Creek, and Captain John Rapids acclimation facilities. Salmon 1C1 Quantify population specific adult and juvenile abundance information 25
Quantify adult abundance, distribution and SARs. Quantify status and monitor trend of adult abundance at Lower Granite Dam for each release group from the Pittsburg Landing, Big Canyon Creek, and Captain John Rapids acclimation facilities. Quantify status, monitor trend and document the distribution of fall Chinook salmon redds in the Grande Ronde, Imnaha and Salmon Rivers. Quantify status and monitor trend of SARs at Lower Granite Dam for each release group from the Pittsburg Landing, Big Canyon Creek, and Captain John Rapids acclimation facilities. Clearwater 1A2 evaluate Clearwater specific adult abundance...Develop appropriate historic (e.g. run reconstruction) data and long term evaluation protocols, 3B3 Develop appropriate historic (e.g. run reconstruction) data and long term evaluation protocols 14, 19
Quantify and compare fish size and condition. Quantify and compare size and condition of each juvenile hatchery fall Chinook release group from the Pittsburg Landing, Big Canyon Creek, and Captain John Rapids acclimation facilities. Snake Hells Canyon 2A7 Maximize natural and artificial production effectiveness in the subbasin, 2A8 Monitor and evaluate effectiveness of implementation of artificial and natural production strategies 18
Quantify and compare fish size and condition. Quantify and compare size and condition of each juvenile hatchery fall Chinook release group from the Pittsburg Landing, Big Canyon Creek, and Captain John Rapids acclimation facilities. Clearwater 3B3 Increase hatchery effectiveness 19
Quantify survival, migration rate and arrival time Quantify status and compare trend of post-release survival for each juvenile hatchery fall chinook release group from the Pittsburg Landing, Big Canyon Creek, and Captain John Rapids acclimation facilities to Lower Granite and McNary Dams. Quantify status and compare trend of post-release migration rate and arrival timing for each juvenile hatchery fall chinook release group from the Pittsburg Landing, Big Canyon Creek, and Captain John Rapids acclimation facilities to Lower Granite, Little Goose, Lower Monumental, McNary, John Day and Bonneville Dams. Correlate migration rate to Lower Granite Dam of each FCAP release group with flow and temperature at Hell's Canyon Dam, Anatone, Peck. Clearwater 3B3 Increase hatchery effectiveness, develop hatchery fish stocking and marking guidelines to optimize the use of hatchery fish, 1A1 research to identify management vs environmental effects, 1A3 increase out-of-subbasin migration conditions and survival 14, 19
Quantify survival, migration rate and arrival time Quantify status and compare trend of post-release survival for each juvenile hatchery fall chinook release group from the Pittsburg Landing, Big Canyon Creek, and Captain John Rapids acclimation facilities to Lower Granite and McNary Dams. Quantify status and compare trend of post-release migration rate and arrival timing for each juvenile hatchery fall chinook release group from the Pittsburg Landing, Big Canyon Creek, and Captain John Rapids acclimation facilities to Lower Granite, Little Goose, Lower Monumental, McNary, John Day and Bonneville Dams. Correlate migration rate to Lower Granite Dam of each FCAP release group with flow and temperature at Hell's Canyon Dam, Anatone, Peck. Snake Hells Canyon 2A7 Maximize natural and artificial production effectiveness, 2A8 Monitor effectiveness of artificial and natural production strategies, 2A9 Monitor effects of limiting factors, 2A7 develop knowledge of wild-hatchery interaction 18-19

Section 7: Work Elements
Work Elements and Associated Biological Objectives
Work Element Name Work Element Title Description Start Date End Date Estimated Budget
Produce Environmental Compliance Documentation Produce environmental compliance documentation to BPA Obtain clearance from BPA's Environmental Compliance Group that environmental compliance requirements are complete for FY06 work on or before this milestone date. Obtain and renew all necessary local, state, federal or tribal permits. Comply with permit conditions and reporting requirements. Provide copies of permits to BPA as requested. Submit all SOW documents and copies of ESA permits to BPA's Environmental Compliance Group for review. 1/1/2007 12/31/2007 $1,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Manage project, coordinate and communicate
No Metrics for this Work Element

Coordination Local and regional inter/intra-agency coordination. Attend bi-annual fall Chinook coordination meetings. Attend LFH AOP meeting. Participate in Research Division monthly coordination conference calls. Attend any other pertinent inter/intra-agency coordination meetings. Coordinate data collection, analysis and reporting activities with appropriate agencies and staff. 1/1/2007 12/31/2009 $40,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Manage project, coordinate and communicate
No Metrics for this Work Element

Manage and Administer Projects Manage and administer the FCAP M&E project. Work with NPT Human Resource and Finance Departments as necessary. Work with BPA and COTR as required. Submit accruals as requested. Prepare helicopter services subcontract. Prepare and submit annual SOWs, budget, spending plans and property inventories to BPA. Attend workshops and training. 1/1/2007 12/31/2009 $40,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Manage project, coordinate and communicate
No Metrics for this Work Element

Produce Annual Report Annual Reports We will produce annual reports that will include our FCAP monitoring activities and results including juvenile size and condition, health, survival, migration charateristics and adult abundance and SARs. We will co-author an annual redd count and distrbution reports. We will also co-author annual reports for our study to compare acclimated and direct releases. 1/1/2008 3/31/2010 $71,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Manage project, coordinate and communicate
No Metrics for this Work Element

Produce Pisces Status Report Produce quarterly status report in Pisces We will submit status reports in Pisces for federal fiscal year quarters. 4/15/2007 1/15/2010 $6,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Manage project, coordinate and communicate
No Metrics for this Work Element

Produce Status Report Status and activity report to NPT DFRM We will produce a quarterly status and activity report to the NPT DFRM. 4/15/2007 1/15/2010 $3,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Manage project, coordinate and communicate
No Metrics for this Work Element

Produce/Submit Scientific Findings Report Publish manuscripts of our study in peer-reviewed journals. We expect to publish a manuscript on the subyearling component of our study to compare acclimated and direct release subyearlings in a peer-reviewed journal by 2008. The adult component of our study should produce a journal publication by 2015. 1/1/2008 12/31/2009 $25,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Manage project, coordinate and communicate
No Metrics for this Work Element

Analyze/Interpret Data Analyze adult abundance, distribution and SAR data. TAC is responsible for run reconstruction analysis of adults at Lower Granite Dam. We will serve as a technical advisor to TAC for this task. From run reconstruction results, we will analyze SARs for each FCAP release group. We will interpret the redd count abundance and distribution data collected on the Grande Ronde, Imnaha and Salmon Rivers. 1/1/2007 12/31/2009 $35,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Quantify adult abundance, distribution and SARs.
Primary R, M, and E Type: Status and Trend Monitoring

Analyze/Interpret Data Analyze FCAP fish health data. We analyze and interpret fish health data received from the Idaho Fish Health Lab. Data are consolidated into tables and incorporated into annual reports. 6/1/2007 12/31/2009 $6,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Monitor and report fish health.
No Metrics for this Work Element

Analyze/Interpret Data Analyze length and weight data. Calculate condition factor by: K = (Weight (g)/Length (mm)^3) x 10^5. Calculate mean, median, standard deviation and range for length, weight and condition factor. Construct frequency distributions for length and condition factor. We will use a One-way ANOVA to test the hypotheses: there is no difference in fork length and there is no difference in condition factor between release sites. We will use Tukey’s HSD for multiple comparisons. In addition, we will use a Kolmogorov-Smirnov two-sample test to test the hypotheses: there is no difference in fork length distribution and there is no difference in condition factor distribution between release sites. Differences are considered significant at a = 0.05. 7/1/2007 12/31/2009 $18,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Quantify and compare fish size and condition.
Primary R, M, and E Type: Project Implementation/ Compliance Monitoring
Focal Area: Hatchery

Analyze/Interpret Data Analyze PIT tag interrogation and adult return data. We will work cooperatively with USFWS and WDFW to analyze PIT tag data for: (1) passage date at Lower Granite Dam, (2) travel time to Lower Granite Dam, (3) survival from release to the tailrace of Lower Granite Dam, (4) growth and condition measured from release to Lower Granite Dam. We will work cooperatively with TAC and WDFW to analyze run reconstruction to estimate smolt-to-adult return rates measured from release to Lower Granite Dam 1/1/2007 12/31/2009 $6,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Compare direct-stream and acclimated releases.
Primary R, M, and E Type: Uncertainties Research

Analyze/Interpret Data Analyze PIT tag interrogation data. Survival probabilities of FCAP release groups to Lower Granite and McNary Dams are estimated by the Cormack, Jolly, and Seber (1964, 1965, and 1965, respectively, as cited in Smith et al. 1994) methodology using the Survival Under Proportional Hazards (SURPH, version 2.2a) computer modeling program (Lady et al. 2002) as described in Statistical Survival Analysis of Fish and Wildlife Tagging Studies (Smith et. al. 1994). We use a Z-test to test the hypotheses: there is no difference in survival to Lower Granite Dam and there is no difference in survival to McNary Dam between release sites. Differences are considered significant at a = 0.05. We will quantify travel time, migration rate and arrival timing for each FCAP release group to Lower Granite, Little Goose, Lower Monumental, McNary, John Day and Bonneville Dams. We will use a Kolmogorov-Smirnov two-Sample Test to test the hypotheses: there is no difference in travel time distribution and there is no difference in arrival date distribution between release sites. We will use a One-way ANOVA to test the hypothesis: there is no difference in migration rate to Lower Granite, McNary and Bonneville dams between release sites. We then use Tukey’s HSD for multiple comparisons. Differences are considered significant at a = 0.05. We will use the Pearson product moment correlation coefficient (a = 0.05) to examine the relationship between migration rates to Lower Granite Dam with flows at Hell’s Canyon Dam and flows and temperatures at Anatone and Peck. 10/1/2007 12/31/2009 $38,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Quantify survival, migration rate and arrival time
Primary R, M, and E Type: Status and Trend Monitoring
Focal Area: Hydrosystem

Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data Collect and validate adult abundance and redd count data. Assist NOAA Fisheries with adult data collection at Lower Granite Dam. Collect and validate numbers of redds and redd locations on the Grande Ronde, Imnaha and Salmon Rivers. 1/1/2007 12/31/2009 $220,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Quantify adult abundance, distribution and SARs.
Primary R, M, and E Type: Status and Trend Monitoring

Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data Collect and validate length and weight data. We will sample 100 fish from each of the 16 tanks (1,600 fish total) at time of release at Pittsburg Landing and Big Canyon. Sampling will occur while the water is drawn down as the fish are being released. This will effectively crowd the fish and provide a random and representative sample over the entire release group. The Captain John Rapids facility is a pond rather than tanks and a volitional release strategy is employed. We will sample 1,600 fish from the pond on the first day of the volitional release. We will capture fish at various locations in the pond using a long-handle dipnet. Length and weight data will be collected using a PIT tag data collection station manufactured by Biomark, Inc. (Boise, Idaho). Fork lengths of yearlings are measured to the nearest 1.0 mm using a CalComp 2000 digitized measuring board. The lengths are then categorized into 5 mm increment groups to calculate the frequency distributions. Weights are collected to the nearest 0.1 g using an Ohaus FY-3000 balance. Data will be stored in a spreadsheet database and validated by project staff. 5/1/2007 7/31/2009 $38,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Quantify and compare fish size and condition.
Primary R, M, and E Type: Project Implementation/ Compliance Monitoring
Focal Area: Hatchery

Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data Collect and validate PIT tag data. All tag, length, weight, tag/mark and general condition data are recorded using a computerized data collection station manufactured by Biomark Inc. (Boise, Idaho). Tagging data are proofed for mistakes, validated for format compliance and uploaded to the Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission (PSMFC) PIT Tag Information System (PTAGIS) database. 4/1/2007 6/30/2009 $80,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Quantify survival, migration rate and arrival time
Primary R, M, and E Type: Status and Trend Monitoring
Focal Area: Hydrosystem

Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data Collect and validate PIT tagging and adult abundance data. Collect and validate data from PIT tagging of 3,500 subyearlings at the Captain John Rapids facility. Assist NOAA Fisheries with data collection on adult returns at Lower Granite Dam. Cooperate with WDFW to validate adult return data. 1/1/2007 12/31/2009 $30,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Compare direct-stream and acclimated releases.
Primary R, M, and E Type: Uncertainties Research

Create/Manage/Maintain Database Create and manage length and weight database. Length and weight data will be entered and stored into a spreadsheet database. This database will be maintained by project staff. 1/1/2007 12/31/2009 $6,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Quantify and compare fish size and condition.
No Metrics for this Work Element

Create/Manage/Maintain Database Manage FCAP fish health database. We receive fish health data from the Idaho Fish Health Lab and enter it into a local database, which we manage. 6/1/2007 12/31/2009 $6,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Monitor and report fish health.
No Metrics for this Work Element

Create/Manage/Maintain Database Manage local PIT tag database. All PIT tagging detail and interrogation data will be managed in a local spreadsheet database. 5/1/2007 12/31/2009 $6,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Compare direct-stream and acclimated releases.
No Metrics for this Work Element

Create/Manage/Maintain Database Manage local PIT tag database. PIT tag tagging details and interrogation summary data are stored in a local spreadsheet database after tagging and download from PTAGIS, respectively. Project staff manage this database. 1/1/2007 12/31/2009 $6,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Quantify survival, migration rate and arrival time
No Metrics for this Work Element

Create/Manage/Maintain Database Manage local redd count and distribution database. This project will manage the redd count data we collect in a local database. 9/1/2007 12/31/2009 $6,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Quantify adult abundance, distribution and SARs.
No Metrics for this Work Element

Disseminate Raw/Summary Data and Results Disseminate summary reports of results and give oral presentations to professional audiences. We will prepare and distribute FCAP release reports summarizing the release dates, CWT code, total number of fish released, number of fish with CWT, number of fish with adipose fin clip, number unmarked, mean length, mean weight and fish per pound. We will prepare and distribute weekly and end of season summary report for redd counts. Regardless of the outcome of our study to compare acclimated and direct subyearling releases, we will deliver our findings to managers on an annual basis in written progress reports and oral presentations. 1/1/2008 12/31/2009 $6,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Manage project, coordinate and communicate
No Metrics for this Work Element

Mark/Tag Animals PIT tag portion of acclimated release group. PIT tag 3,500 subyearling fall chinook from the acclimated release group at Captain John Rapids. All fish selected for tagging are examined for existing PIT tags. The fish are then PIT tagged measured and examined for general condition, with a subsample weighed. All tag, length, weight and general condition data are recorded using a computerized data collection station manufactured by Biomark Inc. (Boise, Idaho). PIT tags are injected into the abdomen using manual hypodermic injectors following the general methods described by Prentice et al. (1986, 1990) and Matthews et al. (1990, 1992). Hypodermic injectors and PIT tags are sterilized in ethanol for at least ten minutes and allowed to dry prior to each usage. 5/1/2007 6/30/2009 $24,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Compare direct-stream and acclimated releases.
Primary R, M, and E Type: Uncertainties Research

Mark/Tag Animals PIT tag portion of each FCAP release group. PIT tag up to 5,000 fish from each yearling release group and up to 8,000 from each subyearling release group. All fish selected for tagging are examined for existing PIT tags. The fish are then PIT tagged, measured and examined for adipose fin clip and general condition, with a subsample weighed. All tag, length, weight, tag/mark and general condition data are recorded using a computerized data collection station manufactured by Biomark Inc. (Boise, Idaho). PIT tags are injected into the abdomen using manual hypodermic injectors following the general methods described by Prentice et al. (1986, 1990) and Matthews et al. (1990, 1992). Hypodermic injectors and PIT tags are sterilized in ethanol for at least ten minutes and allowed to dry prior to each usage. All fish selected for tagging are examined for existing PIT tags. The fish are then PIT tagged, measured and examined for adipose fin clip and general condition, with a subsample weighed. All tag, length, weight, mark retention and general condition data are recorded using a computerized data collection station manufactured by Biomark Inc. (Boise, Idaho). PIT tags are injected into the abdomen using manual hypodermic injectors following the general methods described by Prentice et al. (1986, 1990) and Matthews et al. (1990, 1992). Hypodermic injectors and PIT tags are sterilized in ethanol for at least ten minutes and allowed to dry prior to each usage. 4/1/2007 6/30/2009 $375,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Quantify survival, migration rate and arrival time
Primary R, M, and E Type: Status and Trend Monitoring
Focal Area: Hydrosystem

Submit/Acquire Data Submit adult abundance and redd count data. Adult abundance data will be collected and complied to a database by NOAA Fisheries. These data will be transferred to a WDFW database and subsequently to TAC for run reconstruction analysis. Redd count data will be entered into a local NPT managed database and subsequently submitted to a USFWS database. 1/1/2007 12/31/2009 $6,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Quantify adult abundance, distribution and SARs.
No Metrics for this Work Element

Submit/Acquire Data Upload PIT tag data to and download interrogation data from PTAGIS database. Tagging data are proofed for mistakes, validated for format compliance and uploaded to the Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission (PSMFC) PIT Tag Information System (PTAGIS) database. PIT tag interrogation data are downloaded from the PTAGIS database for analysis. 4/1/2007 12/31/2009 $6,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Quantify survival, migration rate and arrival time
No Metrics for this Work Element

Submit/Acquire Data Upoad PIT tag data to and download interrogation data from PTAGIS database. PIT tag data from the acclimated release group at Captain John Rapids will be uploaded to the PTAGIS database. Tagging details and interrogation data will be downloaded from the PTAGIS database. 5/1/2007 11/30/2009 $6,608
Biological Objectives Metrics
Compare direct-stream and acclimated releases.
No Metrics for this Work Element


Section 8: Budget

Itemized Estimated Budget
Item Note FY 2007 Cost FY 2008 Cost FY 2009 Cost
Personnel 2 FTE @ 26 pay periods, 1 FTE at 5 pay periods, 5 FTE at 2 pay periods, 1 FTE at 1 pay period. Hazardous duty pay for helicopter flight days. $133,962 $137,929 $142,004
Fringe Benefits 2 FTE @ 26 pay periods, 1 FTE at 5 pay periods, 5 FTE at 2 pay periods, 1 FTE at 1 pay period. $34,732 $35,127 $35,537
Supplies Office and computer supplies, field equipment repair and maintenance, field supplies. $6,360 $6,360 $6,360
Travel Coordination meetings, workshops, AFS meetings, training, etc. $3,800 $3,900 $4,000
Capital Equipment PIT tag monitoring equipment for outlet pipe at Captain John Rapids acclimation facility. $14,000 $ 0 $ 0
Overhead Indirect Costs estimated at 30% $55,386 $57,251 $59,200
Other Helicopter services subcontract $38,400 $39,600 $40,800
Other PIT tags - 39,000 per year based on cost of $2.06/tag $80,340 $80,340 $80,340
Other GSA Vehicle Lease - 1 one-half ton pickup truck $4,800 $4,960 $5,120
Totals $371,780 $365,467 $373,361

Total Estimated FY 2007-2009 Budgets
Total Itemized Budget$1,110,608
Total Work Element budget$1,110,608

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

Section 9: Project Future
Project Future Costs and/or Termination
FY 2010 Est Budget FY 2011 Est Budget Comments
$285,000 $297,000 Outyear budget increases are due to cost of living allowance.
Future Operations & Maintenance Costs
 
Termination Date Comments
Ongoing This project is the monitoring and evaluation component for the FCAP supplementation program. As such, this project is expected to be ongoing at some level as long as operations of the FCAP project continue.
 
Final Deliverables

Section 10: Narrative
Document Type Size Date

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 Budget
$ 0
FY 2008 Budget
$ 0
FY 2009 Budget
$ 0
Total NPCC Rec
$ 0
Budget Type:Expense
Budget Category:ProvinceExpense
Recommendation:Do Not Fund
Comments:


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

FY 2007 Budget
$ 0
FY 2008 Budget
$ 0
FY 2009 Budget
$ 0
Total NPCC Rec
$ 0
FY 2007 MSRT Rec
$ 0
FY 2008 MSRT Rec
$ 0
FY 2009 MSRT Rec
$ 0
Total MSRT Rec
$ 0
Budget Category:ProvinceExpense
Comments:

Local or MSRT Comments: The Budget cannot accommodate this Bi-op designated project, however, if additional funding becomes available, consider funding this project as a high priority.


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

Recommendation: Not fundable (Qualified)
NPCC Comments: Although the ISRP continues to recognize the need for a good M&E program to be in place to assess the effectiveness of these Snake River Fall Chinook Acclimation Facilities, we recommend (again) that this program should not be funded until an adequate proposal/response be received from the authors explaining how that would occur. It is clear that some data collection is occurring; what is not clear is whether or not adequate evaluation of those data is being accomplished. We qualify our recommendation simply because we realize that an adequate M&E component needs to be functioning.

The following three issues were contained in our original June assessment; the response received from the authors demonstrates the basis for our continued concerns.

1. The ISRP is concerned that the metrics used for evaluating fish health (e.g., condition) are not adequate. A response should consider what the best metrics are for evaluating these fish.

Unfortunately, the authors’ response was basically to inform the ISRP that the “USFWS Idaho Fish Health Lab conducts all standard fish health tests for this production program. We in turn analyze, interpret, and report those results.” That statement does not at all address our concerns. The authors go on to add, “We assume the description of standard fish health monitoring methods, from a certified fish health lab, are sufficiently contained in the narrative portion of the proposal.” A simple statement of that assumption is inadequate response because it is irrelevant to our concerns.

2. Methods have been employed since 1996, but it is not clear what has come out of this long-term effort. What has been learned? Sponsors report actions, but not the biological results. A response needs to summarize the results/synthesis of the data collected to date.

The authors responded simply by saying that all needed information was included in the original proposal – but their last sentence enforces our continued concerns, “Along with the summary tables text described the basic statistical test used to analyze data.” Nowhere was there the “results/synthesis of the data collected to date” that we had requested.

3. Objectives for a project like this need to be in biological outcomes, rather than tasks accomplished. The objectives listed are really tasks, not objectives. A response needs to describe how the different objectives and tasks integrate with each other.

If the project is designed simply to generate data – for someone else to analyze and interpret or not - then their response would be adequate, a simple statement that their original objectives met their mark. If, however, the objective is to evaluate not just the numbers, but their biological significance in a framework of biological hypotheses, then what is needed are some clearly stated hypotheses to test what relationship is expected between size or condition and survival, SARS, migration timing, etc. Such an effort is not present in this proposal. Because there has been a repeated call by the ISRP for biological interpretation/information synthesis, their response is inadequate.


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

Recommendation: Response requested
NPCC Comments: The ISRP is concerned that the metrics used for evaluating fish health (e.g., condition) are not adequate. Condition is not an effective measure per se of fish health. Bigger fish and fatter fish are not necessarily healthier fish; they don't explain optimal size and condition. This is a post hoc analysis. A response should consider what are the best metrics for evaluating these fish? This should be based on a more thorough assessment of studied metrics of fish health.

Methods have been employed since 1996, but it is not clear what has come out of this long-term effort. What has been learned? The response needs to summarize the results/synthesis of the data collected to date. Sponsors report actions, but not the biological results.

Objectives for a project like this need to be in biological outcomes, rather than tasks accomplished. The objectives listed are really tasks, not objectives. The response also needs to better describe how the different objectives and tasks integrate with each other.

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