FY 2002 LSRCP proposal 200112

Additional documents

TitleType
Lower Snake River Compensation Plan Overview Powerpoint Presentation Powerpoint Presentation

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal titleLyons Ferry Complex (Lyons Ferry and Tucannon Hatchery) Operations and Maintenance
Proposal ID200112
OrganizationWashington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
NameHarold R. Harty
Mailing addressP.O. Box 278 Starbuck, WA 99359-0278
Phone / email5096469201 / hartyhbh@dfw.wa.gov
Manager authorizing this projectDan Herrig, Coordinator; LSRCP
Review cycleLSRCP
Province / SubbasinMountain Snake / Clearwater
Short descriptionRestore Snake River Fall Chinook fisheries and populations through release of sub-yearling and yearling smolts produced at the Lyons Ferry Complex. Provide a trout fisheries through release of juvenile rainbow trout produced at the Lyons Ferry Complex
Target speciesOncoryhnchus tshawytscha, fall chinook; Oncorynchus mykiss (Kamploop) rainbow trout
Project location
LatitudeLongitudeDescription
46.5894 -118.2196 Lyons Ferry
46.3153 -117.6616 Tucannon Hatchery
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Sponsor-reported:

RPA
Hatchery RPA Action 169
Hatchery RPA Action 170
Hatchery RPA Action 173
Hatchery RPA Action 174
Hatchery RPA Action 176

Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:

Reviewing agencyAction #BiOp AgencyDescription

Section 2. Past accomplishments

YearAccomplishment
1995 Propagate 50K fry and 25K fingerling Spokane stock rainbow trout
1996 Propagate 50K fry and 25K fingerling Spokane stock rainbow trout
1997 Propagate 200K yearling fall Chinook, 254K sub-yearling fall Chinook, 50K fry and 25K fingerling Spokane stock rainbow trout
1998 Propagate 68K yearling fall Chinook, 76K sub-yearling fall Chinook, 23K fingerling Kamloop rainbow trout and 50K fry Spokane stock rainbow trout
1999 Propagate 232K yearling fall Chinook, 351K sub-yearling fall Chinook, 23K fingerling Kamloop rainbow trout and 50K fry Spokane stock rainbow trout
2000 Propagate 136K yearling fall Chinook, 898K sub-yearling fall Chinook, 25K fingerling Kamloop rainbow trout and 50K fry Spokane stock rainbow trout
2001 Propagate 116K yearling fall Chinook, 862K sub-yearling fall Chinook, 25K fingerling Kamloop rainbow trout and 50K fry Spokane stock rainbow trout

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Project IDTitleDescription
Lower Snake River Compensation Plan (LSRCP) Mitigation for damages caused to populations of fish and wildlife within the Lower Snake River as a result of construction of the four lower Snake dams (part of the FCRPS)
US v Oregon CRFMP Production will meet agreements negotiated in the CRFMP.
Idaho Fish and Game - Resident trout program Lyons Ferry production transferred to IDF&G for release in the Clearwater Basin.
199801004 LSRCP Monitoring and Evaluation - Nez Perce Tribe (NPT) Lyons Ferry production transferred to NPT operated acclimation facilities for release in Clearwater Basin. Documents adult run size, evaluates acclimated rearing, size and time of release.
8335000 Nez Perce Tribal Hatchery Lyons Ferry production transferred to NPT operated acclimation facilities for release. Fall Chinook broodstock for NPT hatchery derived from adult returns of Lyons Ferry production
199801003 USFWS - Fall Chinook Spawning Distribution Fall Chinook spawning distribution within basin via radio telemetry and aerial flights

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2002 costSubcontractor
(Not Applicable) $0
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
(Not Applicable) $0
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase

Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2002 costSubcontractor
(Not Applicable) $0
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
(Not Applicable) $0
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase

Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2002 costSubcontractor
1. Coordinate Lyons Ferry Complex operations with co-managers a. Develop Annual Operations Plan (AOP) directing Lyons Ferry Complex operations and co-manager activities. continuous $2,300
b. Participate in periodic Lyons Ferry Complex operations reviews and quarterly coordination meetings with co-managers to coordinate activities. continuous $0
2. Produce 150K smolt Snake River stock fall Chinook a. Collect broodstock at Lyons Ferry Hatchery and Lower Granite Dam, transport to adult holding at Lyons Ferry Hatchery continuous $96,725
b. Spawn adults and incubate eggs at Lyons Ferry Hatchery continuous $0
c. Pond fry and juvenile per production profile continuous $0
d. Perform fish health (i.e., sinpection, treatment, etc.), propagation (i.e., feeding, pond cleaning, etc.) and facility main- tenance on a scheduled and as needed basis. continuous $0
e. Adipose fin clip, CWT and VI (elastomer) tag continuous $0
f. Transport to NPT acclimation facilities for release continuous $0
3. Produce 1.2M sub-yearling Snake River stock fall Chinook (estimated as sub-yearling production dependant on egg take and PAC decisions a. Collect broodstock at Lyons Ferry Hatchery and Lower Granite Dam, transport to adult holding at Lyons Ferry Hatchery continuous $813,026
b. Spawn adults and incubate eggs at Lyons Ferry Hatchery continuous $0
c. Pond fry per production profile continuous $0
d. Perform fish health (i.e., inspection, treatment, etc.), propagation (i.e., feeding, pond cleaning, etc.) and facility maintenance on a scheduled and as needed basis. continuous $0
e. Adipose fin clip, CWT and VI (elastomer) tag continuous $0
f. Transport to NPT acclimation facilities for release continuous $0
4. Produce 25K fingerling Kamloop rainbow trout a. Receive at Tucannon Hatchery 37K eyed eggs from Hayspur Hatchery continuous $15,076
b. Trough and pond fry and juvenile per production profile continuous $0
c. Transfer juvenile to Lyons Ferry Hatchery for final rearing and marking continuous $0
d. Perform fish health (i.e., inspection, treatment, etc.), propagation (i.e., feeding, pond cleaning, etc.) and facility maintenance on a scheduled and as needed basis. continuous $0
e. Left ventral fin clip continuous $0
f. Transfer to Idaho Fish and Game for release continuous $0
5. Produce 50K fry Spokane rainbow trout a. Receive eyed eggs from Spokane Hatchery continuous $32,422
b. Trough and pond fry per production profile continuous $0
c. Perform fish health (i.e., inspection, treatment, etc.), propagation (i.e., feeding, pond cleaning, etc.) and facility maintenance on a scheduled and as needed basis. continuous $0
d. Transfer to Idaho Fish and Game for release continuous $0
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
1. Coordinate Lyons Ferry Complex Operations with co-managers 2003 2006 $10,422
2. Produce 150K smolt Snake River stock fall chinook 2003 2006 $437,730
3. Produce 1.2M sub-yearling Snake River fall chinook 2003 2006 $3,679,453
4. Produce 25K fingerling Kamloop rainbow trout 2003 2006 $68,178
5. Produce 50K fry Spokane stock rainbow trout 2003 2006 $146,779
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase
FY 2003FY 2004FY 2005FY 2006
$1,007,526$1,057,902$1,110,797$1,166,337

Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2002 costSubcontractor
(Not Applicable) $0
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
(Not Applicable) $0
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget
ItemNoteFY 2002 cost
Personnel FTE: 6.24 $248,480
Fringe @ 26.2% $65,107
Supplies $282,199
Travel $5,327
Indirect 25.2% $169,376
Capital $60,261
Other Fish Marking Cost $128,799
$959,549
Total estimated budget
Total FY 2002 cost$959,549
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds$0
Total FY 2002 budget request$959,549
FY 2002 forecast from 2001$0
% change from forecast0.0%
Cost sharing
OrganizationItem or service providedAmountCash or in-kind

Reviews and recommendations

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

Recommendation:
Fundable only if response is adequate
Date:
Dec 21, 2001

Comment:

A response is needed. The proposal is more logically organized and is more thorough in terms of stating results, i.e., the project history section contains results than proposal 200103 and many other LSRCP proposals; however, it still suffers from extensive repetition of text from other LSRCP proposals. Many of the review comments from those proposals and the programmatic comments at the beginning of the LSRCP review section are pertinent to this proposal as well. More attention needs to be paid to reporting of past results, providing biological justification and ecological context for the projects proposed actions, and to the reporting and sharing of data.
Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Apr 23, 2002

Comment:

Fundable. The respondents presented a helpful package of information and responses to ISRP questions. Their responses amply address the ISRP's preliminary review requests for description of the scientific basis for the program; reference to relevant literature on steelhead residualization and reproductive performance; clarification of technical matters such as sample site selection and assessment of data quality; description of broodstock development; and clarification of harvest goals. If future preparations for review build on this, the processing of the resultant materials should be efficient. WDFW should be congratulated on their efforts to reduce straying, production, and to protect endemic gene pools.

Although they have taken considerable action to prevent their program from causing further jeopardy for wild stocks, and will continue to do so, they inform the ISRP that they will not stop mitigation actions authorized under the LSRCP. They blame NMFS in one instance, for not providing guidance on the amount of reduction needed to preclude deleterious effects in wild fish, but WDFW should take responsibility in determining what steps to take to avoid potential harm caused by the fish they release. The intent of this program is to use LSRCP authorization to produce fish for harvest, but a primary intent of other basin programs is to conserve native species and increase abundance to useful and persistent levels. These differing views of "basin management" may have several incompatibilities.

If hatchery production (Project 200114) was reduced by 7,000 lb annually to redirect some money into habitat structure construction (p 4), does that habitat structure work continue today?