FY 2007 Solicitation Homepage

Project Proposal Request for FY 2007 - FY 2009 Funding

Proposal 199602000: Pit Tagging Spring/Summer Chin

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 Dona Watson

Proposal Type: Ongoing
Proposal Number: 199602000
Proposal Name: Pit Tagging Spring/Summer Chin
BPA Project Manager: Tracy Hauser
Agency, Institution or Organization: Columbia River Fisheries Program Office
Short Description: Adult and juvenile PIT tag recovery data are analyzed to compare survival estimates for transported fish of known origin, downriver stocks, wild and hatchery transported fish and fish handled and not handled at dams.
Information Transfer: To address the question, "can transportation of fish to below Bonneville Dam compensate for the effect of the hydro system on juvenile survival rates of the Snake River spring and summer Chinook salmon during their downstream migration?" The information will be posted on a website and used to publish reports.
 
Project Proposal Contacts
Contact Organization Address Phone/Email Roles Notes
Form Submitter
Dona Watson Fish Passage Center 1827 NE 44th Ave, Suite 240
Portland OR 97213
Ph: 503.230.4099
Fax: 503.230.7559
Email: dwatson@fpc.org
Form Submitter
All Assigned Contacts
Robert Haverkate USFWS-CRFPO 1211 SE Cardinal Ct - Suite 100
Vancouver, WA 98683
Ph: 360.604.2500
Fax: 360.604.2505
Email: Bob_Haverkate@fws.gov
Administrative Contact
Howard Schaller USFWS-CRFPO 1211 SE Cardinal Ct - Suite 100
Vancouver, WA 98683
Ph: 360.604.2500
Fax: 360.604.2505
Email: howard_schaller@fws.gov
Project Lead

Section 2: Project Location
Sponsor Province: Mainstem/Systemwide ARG Province: No Change
Sponsor Subbasin: Systemwide ARG Subbasin: No Change
Location(s) at which the action will be implemented
Latitude Longitude Waterbody Location Description County/State Subbasin Primary?
46.510318 -116.371537 Dworshak Hatchery Clearwater, Idaho Clearwater No
42.61139 -114.4828 Magic Valley Hatchery Twin Falls, Idaho Snake Upper No
45.51031 -121.8351 Carson Hatchery Skamania, Washington Wind No
42.76639 -114.8736 Hagerman Hatchery Twin Falls, Idaho Snake Upper No
45.8958 -119.4903 Irrigon Hatchery Morrow, Oregon Columbia Lower Middle No
45.7333 -118.2 Looking Glass Hatchery Union, Oregon Grande Ronde No
45.5666 -116.8333 Imnaha River AP Release Site Wallowa, Oregon Imnaha No
45.1833 -117.8167 Catherine Creek AP Release Site Union, Oregon Grande Ronde No
46.42450 -116.9174 Clearwater River Clearwater Trap Nez Perce, Idaho Clearwater No
46.06 -116.98 Grande Ronde River Grande Ronde Fish Trap Asotin, Washington Grande Ronde No
46.30 -116.18 North Fork Clearwater River Clearwater Hatchery Clearwater, Idaho Clearwater No
44.8914 -116.0793 Payette River McCall Hatchery Valley, Idaho Payette No
45.4215 -116.3166 Salmon River Rapid River Hatchery Idaho, Idaho Salmon No
45.66 -116.29 Salmon River Salmon River Trap Idaho, Idaho Salmon No
46.42 -117.03 Snake River Snake River Trap (Lewiston) Nez Perce, Idaho Clearwater No
42.66361 -114.6783 Snake River Niagara Twin Falls, Idaho Snake Upper No
45.6120 -122.4950 USFWS-CRFPO office at 1211 SE Cardinal Court, Ste 100, Vancouver, WA 98683 Clark, Washington None Selected Yes

Section 3: Focal Species
Focal Species:
Primary Secondary Additional Species
Chinook All Populations
Steelhead All Populations

Section 4: Past Accomplishments
Past Accomplishments for Each Fiscal Year of This Project
Fiscal Year Accomplishments
2005 Completed the 2003/04 Annual Report for Migration Years 1997-2002 Mark/Recapture Activities and Bootstrap Analysis in April 2005. Completed the 2005 Annual Report Mark/Recpature Activities and Bootstrap Analysis in December 2005
2004 Conducted a Comparative Survival Study Workshop.
2003 Completed the 2002 Annual Report for Migration Years 1997-2000 Mark/Recapture Activities and Bootstrap Analysis.
2002 Finalized the annual status report for Migration Years 1997-2000 Mark/Recapture Activities.
2001 Completed the annual status report for Migration Years 1997-2000 Mark-Recapture Activities (published as final 2/2/2002).
2000 Completed annual status report of adult returns through 1998 and juvenile data through 1999.
1999 Application of tags, reporting juvenile survival indices, travel time, design and installation of Rapid River volitional detector, annual report of adult returns and SARs
1998 Application of tag groups, reporting juvenile survival indices, and travel time
1997 Application of tags, reporting of juvenile survival estimates
1996 Application of tags, reporting of juvenile survival estimates

Section 5: Relationships to Other Projects
Other Current Projects Related to this Project (any funding source)
Funding Source Related ID Related Project Title Relationship
BPA 198712700 Smolt Monitoring By Non-Feder Utilizes wild Chinook and steelhead PIT-tagged at SMP traps including both fish tagged specifically for CSS and SMP projects.
BPA 199008000 Columbia Basin Pit-Tag Informa All CSS PIT-tag data is submitted to PTAGIS for storage on that regional database.
BPA 199008001 Pit Tag Purchases All CSS applied PIT tags are purchased from BPA. In addition, CSS may use PIT-tag data located on PTAGIS from other sources, if available.

Section 6: Biological Objectives
Biological Objectives of this Proposed Project
Biological Objective Full Description Associated Subbasin Plan Strategy Page Nos
Estimate SARs Estimate smolt-to-adult survival rate (SAR) for transported wild and hatchery stream type Chinook and steelhead. None [Strategy left blank] [Pg no blank]
SAR Hydro Goal Determine if SAR rates are significantly different from the interim SAR hydro goal. None [Strategy left blank] [Pg no blank]
T/C Ratios Estimate transport/control ratio and in-river survival rates for wild and hatchery yearling Chinook and steelhead concurrently over a number of years in order to span a range of environmental conditions. None [Strategy left blank] [Pg no blank]
Upstream/Downstream Compare SARs of transported and downriver indicator stocks. None [Strategy left blank] [Pg no blank]

Section 7: Work Elements
Work Elements and Associated Biological Objectives
Work Element Name Work Element Title Description Start Date End Date Estimated Budget
PIT Tags CSS Project PIT tag requiment USFWS will purchase and distribute the PIT TAGS needed by each entity for the CSS. The total number of tags anticipated for 2007 is 315,500 at an estimated cost of $2.25 per tag. 12/1/2006 11/30/2009 $2,172,470
Biological Objectives Metrics
No Metrics for this Work Element

Produce Environmental Compliance Documentation ESA Permit Project sponsor will ensure that all ESA permits are obtained and ESA reporting is completed. 12/1/2006 11/30/2009 $4,590
Biological Objectives Metrics
No Metrics for this Work Element

Coordination Intra-agency coordination to facilitate internal agency discussions and policy approvals. The project sponsor, marking agencies (USFWS, ODFW, & IDFG) and the CSS Oversight and Analysis Committee members (WDFW, CRITFC, ODFW, IDFG, USFWS) must coordinate within the project and with other agencies as necessary to complete the objectives and tasks of the study. 12/1/2006 11/30/2009 $65,800
Biological Objectives Metrics
No Metrics for this Work Element

Manage and Administer Projects IDFG and ODFW management, administration and overhead. IDFG and ODFW provide management and administration of their respective on-site marking sites for the CSS project. IDFG at the Rapid River Hatchery, McCall Hatchery, Clearwater Hatchery, Niagara Springs Hatchery, and the Salmon and Clearwater traps. ODFW at the Lower Grande Ronde River trap and Lookingglass Hatchery and Irrigon Hatchery. 12/1/2006 11/30/2009 $218,890
Biological Objectives Metrics
No Metrics for this Work Element

Manage and Administer Projects USFWS (CRFPO) management, administration and overhead of CSS contract As the project sponsor, CRFPO provides overall management and administration of the CSS project and the CSS Oversight Committee portion of the project. This includes administration and management of implanting PIT tags at Dworshak NFH, Carson NFH, Hagerman NFH, and Magic Valley NFH. 12/1/2006 11/30/2009 $934,940
Biological Objectives Metrics
No Metrics for this Work Element

Provide Technical Review Review and provide comments on draft annual CSS report The CSS Oversight and Analysis committee members from ODFW, WDFW, CRITFC and IDFG and the USFWS employees assigned to this task will review the draft annual CSS report. 12/1/2006 11/30/2009 $230,600
Biological Objectives Metrics
No Metrics for this Work Element

Produce Annual Report Annual Report USFWS employees of the CSS Oversight and Analysis Committee review and analyse the data from the study and write a draft annual report. 12/1/2006 11/30/2009 $188,980
Biological Objectives Metrics
No Metrics for this Work Element

Produce Annual Report IDFG and ODFW to provide annual summary reports to USFWS IDFG and ODFW will provide annual summary reports of CSS activities and results at their respective CSS tagging sites to USFWS for inclusion in its CSS annual report. 12/1/2006 11/30/2009 $75,220
Biological Objectives Metrics
No Metrics for this Work Element

Produce Status Report Produce Quarterly PISCES Status Reports Complete quarterly status reports in PISCES as required by the contract. 12/1/2006 11/30/2009 $3,210
Biological Objectives Metrics
No Metrics for this Work Element

Analyze/Interpret Data Response to comments, questions, issues, recommendations The Oversight and Analysis Committee (and USFWS employees) are responsibe to develop written comments, oral presentations, and to participate in discussions of specific issues surrounding the CSS. This includes responding to specific technical questions that address statistical design and to more general inquiries regarding study data and analysis. 12/1/2006 11/30/2009 $321,340
Biological Objectives Metrics
No Metrics for this Work Element

Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data IDFG, ODFW & USFWS will collect/generate/validate field and lab data at CSS respective sites in accordance with the CSS Work Plan for 2007. IDFG will perform this work at Rapid River, McCall, Clearwater, and Niagara Springs Hatcheries and the Snake, Salmon & Clearwater Traps. ODFW sites are Lookingglass and Irrigon Hatcheries and the Lower Grande River trap; USFWS will tag at Carson and Dworshak, Hagerman, and Magic Valley National Fish Hatcheries. 12/1/2006 11/30/2009 $158,680
Biological Objectives Metrics
No Metrics for this Work Element

Develop RM&E Methods and Designs Development/Refinement of Study Statistical Design The Oversight and Analysis Committee (and the USFWS employees assigned to this task) in its annual review of the study data and analysis may determine that specific elements of the statistical design need to be modified to meet the original study objectives. The Oversight Committee will develop alternatives and modifications that are determined to be required. These modifications might be precipitated from outside peer review comments and recommendations such as those prepared by the ISRP. 12/1/2006 11/30/2009 $291,650
Biological Objectives Metrics
No Metrics for this Work Element

Install Fish Monitoring Equipment IDFG Installation of Clearwater River Fish Trap Install Clearwater River trap nd have operational by March 6 to collect Chinook and steelhead for PIT tagging for CSS all naturally produced (wild) Chinook and steelhead trout, in excess of Smolt Monitoring Program (SMP) need, March - June 2007. 12/1/2006 11/30/2009 $34,120
Biological Objectives Metrics
No Metrics for this Work Element

Mark/Tag Animals IDFG, ODFW and USFWS to implant PIT tags in accordance with the 2007 CSS Work Plan. ODFW-Lower Grande River trap, Lookingglass and Irrigon Hatcheries. IDFG- Salmon, Snake, and Clearwater traps; Rapid River, McCall, Clearwater and Niagara Springs Hatcheries. USFWS - Carson, Dworshak, Hagerman, and Magic Valley National Fish Hatcheries. 12/1/2006 11/30/2009 $629,820
Biological Objectives Metrics
No Metrics for this Work Element

Submit/Acquire Data IDFG, ODFW and USFWS to submit data to PTAGIS, and others as appropriate IDFG, ODFW, and USFWS submit and acquire date to and from appropriate entities for their respective CSS marking sites as required per the contract. 12/1/2006 11/30/2009 $46,730
Biological Objectives Metrics
No Metrics for this Work Element


Section 8: Budget

Itemized Estimated Budget
Item Note FY 2007 Cost FY 2008 Cost FY 2009 Cost
Personnel IDAHO, ODFW, USFWS $423,255 $435,950 $453,390
Fringe Benefits IDAHO, ODFW, USFWS $147,500 $151,950 $158,000
Supplies IDAHO, ODFW, USFWS $41,150 $42,400 $44,100
Travel IDAHO, ODFW, USFWS $34,570 $35,600 $37,100
Capital Equipment PIT Tags $709,875 $709,875 $709,875
Overhead IDAHO, ODFW, USFWS (includes overall administration of the CSS project) $342,650 $352,900 $367,000
Other Professional fees, trailer moves, hatchery marking $58,000 $59,750 $62,150
Totals $1,757,000 $1,788,425 $1,831,615

Total Estimated FY 2007-2009 Budgets
Total Itemized Budget$5,377,040
Total Work Element budget$5,377,040

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
LSRCP PIT tags and implant 50,000 hatchery steelhead at LSRCP hatcheries in Idaho $147,500 $149,250 $150,720 In-Kind Under Review
Totals $147,500 $149,250 $150,720

Section 9: Project Future
Project Future Costs and/or Termination
FY 2010 Est Budget FY 2011 Est Budget Comments
$1,923,195 $2,019,355 Estimated based on existing program
Future Operations & Maintenance Costs
 
Termination Date Comments
None projected Long term study
 
Final Deliverables
Annual Status Reports

Section 10: Narrative
Document Type Size Date

Part 2 of 2. Reviews of Proposal
Administrative Review Group (ARG) Results
Account Type:
Expense
Location:
Province: No Change
Subbasin: No Change
Primary Focal Species
No Change
ARG Comments:


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

FY 2007 Budget
$915,444
FY 2008 Budget
$ 0
FY 2009 Budget
$ 0
Total NPCC Rec
$ 0
Budget Type:Expense
Budget Category:Basinwide
Recommendation:Under Review
Comments: Budget pending.


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

FY 2007 Budget
$765,000
FY 2008 Budget
$765,000
FY 2009 Budget
$765,000
Total NPCC Rec
$2,295,000
FY 2007 MSRT Rec
$1,365,000
FY 2008 MSRT Rec
$1,365,000
FY 2009 MSRT Rec
$1,365,000
Total MSRT Rec
$4,095,000
Budget Category:Basinwide
Comments: Interim funding pending further Council consideration of regional monitoring and evaluation framework. ISRP fundable (qualified): address ISRP concerns during further consideration.

Local or MSRT Comments: An increase in this budget responds to Council, fish and wildlife managers, ISAB and ISRP requests for the addition of steelhead in the sampling design. Also, with the CBFWA assuming administration of the fish passage functions proposal, a reduction in the budget of approximately $400,000 could occur. This recommendation assumes successful implementation of Project Number 200732100.


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

Recommendation: Fundable (Qualified)
NPCC Comments: The response by the project sponsors was adequate, and they agreed with all ISRP comments and recommendations that were mostly taken from the recent ISAB review report (ISAB 2006-3). One of the major recommendations in that report was that the 10-year ongoing Comparative Survival Study (CSS) project lacked a holistic perspective and needed a summary report providing an in-depth description of methods and detailed analyses and interpretation of the data in a retrospective style. The CSS project responded that they would produce such a report in 2007. As most of the comments and recommendations in this review will be addressed in that report, it is critical that the ISRP/ISAB be involved in review of that report when it is released.

The ISRP agreed with critics who express concern that two downriver sites (Carson Hatchery and John Day River) are probably insufficient to give accurate upriver-downriver comparisons of SARs. This concern is bolstered by the variability among upriver hatcheries shown by the CSS data. For this upriver-downriver comparison to be generally accepted, it seems prudent to add more downriver sites in the future. In response, the CSS will add another downriver site in the Warms Springs River for wild Chinook tagging for 2007 to complement the ongoing tagging in the John Day River. This is a positive action, however, additional downriver hatchery sites are even more important to add because at this time, five upriver hatcheries are being used as tagging sites and only one downriver. There needs to be better hatchery to hatchery comparisons, and adding several lower river hatcheries which show a range in return rates will provide a more realistic comparison in survival rates.

If additional downriver tagging sites are to be added to the CSS, the project sponsors indicate that more funding must be made available, and the ISRP agrees that the budget will need to be adjusted accordingly.

Reporting of results by the project has been good with Annual Reports to BPA for each year of the project. There is potential for production of peer reviewed papers considering project results and this should be considered in the near future.


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

Recommendation: Response requested
NPCC Comments: In general, this is a supportable proposal but a response is needed to address issues raised in the ISAB's recent report: Review of the 2005 Comparative Survival Studies’ (CSS) Annual Report and Applicability of Comparative Survival Studies’ Analysis Results. See www.nwcouncil.org/library/isab/isab2006-3.htm.

Specifically, the proponents should respond to the following selected recommendations from the ISAB report (which was issued after this proposal was submitted):

1) It has been ten years since the CSS was initiated. The report that the ISAB reviewed was the latest in a series of annual progress reports, and thus lacking a holistic perspective. The ISAB recommends that the CSS produce a ten-year summary report providing an in-depth description of methods and detailed analyses and interpretation of the data in a retrospective style.

2) The CSS needs to more effectively present the methodologies used in their analyses (in this proposal as well as their annual report), so the criticism of complicated and convoluted formulas can be avoided. The scattered explanations in several annual progress reports could be consolidated in the ten-year summary recommended above.

3) The ISAB agrees with critics who express concern that two downriver sites (Carson Hatchery and John Day River) are probably insufficient to give accurate upriver-downriver comparisons of SARs. This concern is bolstered by the variability among upriver hatcheries shown by the CSS data. For this upriver-downriver comparison to be generally accepted, it seems prudent to add more downriver sites in the future.

4) Data on size of all PIT-tagged fish from hatcheries and other release sites should be included in the report in much greater detail. Size at release may be a significant factor in differential SARs. The ISAB recommends including a specific section in the report focusing on the potential effects of size at release on survival of all PIT-tagged fish.

5) Assumptions inherent in the analyses should be specifically tested, with continued vigilance toward avoiding bias.

6) Pre-assigning the intended routes of passage at the time of release into in-river and transport groups would greatly simplify calculation of SARs and eliminate much criticism of current methods that are unnecessarily complex. This modification to the study design is scheduled for implementation in 2007 (according to the 2005 Annual Report but this change in protocol should be indicated in the proposal).

7) Analyses could emphasize more diverse metrics of differential survival, thus avoiding the criticism that the project staff focuses mainly on contentious issues such as the relative survival of transported and in-river migrants (T/C ratios) and differential delayed mortality between transported and in-river migrants (D). Passage routes, numbers of dams bypassed, distance from ocean, different hatchery practices, and other features have been explored beyond the issue of transportation.

Other comments:

A timeline with years (1996 - current) should be included within the background section to improve the proposal. Details in this section are sparse and references are lacking. The proponents either assume that the reviewers know all the background and justification for this project or decided not to go through the work needed to provide the details.

The project history section consists of only a few sentences and is lacking sufficient detail to provide project accomplishments and give adequate justification for continued support. For such a long-running project there have been a number of important accomplishments and completed documents that need to be listed in this section.

Please refer to proposal #s 199102900, 199302900, and 198605000 for examples of proposals for long-running projects that have clearly laid out study designs and protocols, project histories with adequate detail, and strong justification for continued support.

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