FY 2002 LSRCP proposal 200114

Section 1. General administrative information
Section 2. Past accomplishments
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
Section 4. Budgets for planning/design phase
Section 5. Budgets for construction/implementation phase
Section 6. Budgets for operations/maintenance phase
Section 7. Budgets for monitoring/evaluation phase
Section 8. Budget summary

Reviews and Recommendations

Additional documents

Title	Type
Lower Snake River Compensation Plan Overview Powerpoint Presentation	Powerpoint Presentation

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal title	Lyons Ferry Complex (Lyons Ferry and Tucannon Hatchery) Operations and Maintenance
Proposal ID	200114
Organization	Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
Name	Harold R. Harty
Mailing address	P.O. Box 278 Starbuck, WA 99359-0278
Phone / email	5096469201 / hartyhbh@dfw.wa.gov
Manager authorizing this project	Dan Herrig, Coordinator; LSRCP
Review cycle	LSRCP
Province / Subbasin	Mountain Snake / Salmon
Short description	Provide a trout fisheries through release of fry and juvenile rainbow trout produced at the Lyons Ferry Complex
Target species	Oncorynchus mykiss - Kamploop and Spokane stock rainbow trout

Project location

Latitude	Longitude	Description
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 agency	Action #	BiOp Agency	Description

Section 2. Past accomplishments

Year	Accomplishment
1995	Propagate 50K fry and 25K fingerling Spokane stock rainbow trout
1996	Propagate 50K fry and 25K fingerling Spokane stock rainbow trout
1997	Propagate 30K fry and 25K fingerling Spokane stock rainbow trout
1998	Propagate 23K fingerling Kamloop rainbow trout and 37K fry Spokane stock rainbow trout
1999	Propagate 23K fingerling Kamloop rainbow trout and 35K fry Spokane stock rainbow trout
2000	Propagate 25K fingerling Kamloop rainbow trout and 37K fry Spokane stock rainbow trout
2001	Propagate 25K fingerling Kamloop rainbow trout and 35K fry Spokane stock rainbow trout

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Project ID	Title	Description
	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)
	Idaho Fish and Game - Resident trout program	Lyons Ferry production transferred to IDF&G for release in the Clearwater Basin.

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2002 cost	Subcontractor
(Not Applicable)			$0

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost
(Not Applicable)			$0

Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase

Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2002 cost	Subcontractor
(Not Applicable)			$0

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost
(Not Applicable)			$0

Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase

Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2002 cost
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	$800
	b. Participate in periodic Lyons Ferry Complex operations reviews and quaterly coordination meetings with co-managers to coordinate activities.	continuous	$0
2. Produce 25K fingerling Kamloop rainbow trout	a. Receive at Tucannon Hatchery 37K eyed eggs from Hayspur Hatchery	continuous	$15,676
	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
3. Produce 35K fry Spokane rainbow trout	a. Receive eyed eggs from Spokane Hatchery	continuous	$22,025
	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

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost
1. Coordinate Lyons Ferry Complex Operations with co-managers	2003	2006	$3,607
2. Produce 25K fingerling Kamloop rainbow trout	2003	2006	$70,951
3. Produce 35K fry Spokane stock rainbow trout	2003	2006	$99,684

Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase

FY 2003	FY 2004	FY 2005	FY 2006
$40,426	$42,447	$44,570	$46,799

Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2002 cost	Subcontractor
(Not Applicable)			$0

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost
(Not Applicable)			$0

Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget

Item	Note	FY 2002 cost
Personnel	FTE: 0.25	$10,006
Fringe	@ 26.2%	$2,622
Supplies		$11,098
Travel		$215
Indirect	25.2%	$6,821
Capital		$2,427
Other	Fish Marking Cost	$5,312
		$38,501

Total estimated budget

Total FY 2002 cost	$38,501
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds	$0
Total FY 2002 budget request	$38,501
FY 2002 forecast from 2001	$0
% change from forecast	0.0%

Cost sharing

Organization	Item or service provided	Amount	Cash or in-kind

Reviews and recommendations

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

REVIEW:
ISRP Preliminary Review (ISRP 2001-12B)

Recommendation:
Fundable only if response is adequate

Date:
Dec 21, 2001

Comment:

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.

REVIEW:
ISRP Final Review (ISRP 2002-6)

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?