Recommendation: Fundable only if response is adequate
Date: Dec 21, 2001
A response is required. This project is part of a set of projects 200118, 200112, 200114, and 200115: Production and evaluation of salmonids released in the Snake River of Washington under the Lower Snake River Compensation Plan (LSRCP) Program. The proposal is mostly for personal costs for participation in evaluation studies and for minor components of the PIT and DNA sampling costs (details were not provided for a capital request of $25K). This proposal is integrated with a larger evaluation proposal submitted by the Nez Perce (project #199801004). These proposals constitute the core assessment of this production.
The proposal lists objectives and tasks in section 9f but the methods are very limited in description and require clarification.
As with many of other LSRCP proposals, we recommend not funding the hatchery monitoring component until evidence is given that monitoring data are stored in an appropriate consistent database for all LSRCP hatcheries and are available through a distributed system via the Internet. The data and evaluation should be consistent with the Dworshak use of the Idaho FRO system (see Task 3.c in Proposal 200101). Results must be given in the proposal even if analyzed by a different project. Given the amount of data and metadata collected, there must be a database in use by this project, but we did not see a description of the database or associated costs.
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?