Views/Actions
Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program
RSS Feed for updates to Project 1983-350-03 - Nez Perce Tribal Hatchery Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Follow this via RSS feed. Help setting up RSS feeds?

Project Summary

Project 1983-350-03 - Nez Perce Tribal Hatchery Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E)
Project Number:
1983-350-03
Title:
Nez Perce Tribal Hatchery Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E)
Summary:
PROJECT SUMMARY FOR 2007:

Plans for 2007 include the monitoring and evaluation of hatchery and natural fish. Primary monitoring activities to be conducted under the Nez Perce Tribal Hatchery Monitoring and Evaluation Program with associated evaluation products:

PIT Tagging • Ongoing • All Stocks (Hatchery & Natural)
1. Estimate and 95% confidence interval of survival from release (or natural parr) to emigration.
2. Estimate and 95% confidence interval of survival (egg-to-smolt and release -to-smolt) to LGR or other mainstem dams.
3. Estimate the percentage of fish barged from LGR and other mainstem dams from each treatment group.
4. Estimate of difference in survival to Lower Granite Dam between spring chinook salmon presmolts that overwinter in the treatment stream and presmolts that overwinter in the Clearwater or Snake rivers.
5. Population estimates and 95% confidence intervals of hatchery and wild juvenile chinook salmon passing the trap as fry, parr, presmolts, and smolts.
6. Estimate and 95% confidence interval for the number of smolts produced from each stream.
Median, 20th percentile, and 80th percentile travel times (days) and arrival at detector dams in the Snake and Columbia rivers.
7. Estimated and 95 % confidence interval of survival during mainstem passage from LGR to JDD for each treatment group.

Weir Operation and/or Spawning Ground Surveys • Ongoing • All Stocks
1. Hatchery and natural escapement at weirs.
2. Counts of hatchery and natural chinook, by age, taken for brood stock.
3. Percentage that each age composes of the returns, by sex, to each stream.
4. Time-frequency of arrival at brood collection points.
5. Differential survival rate between subyearling and yearling smolts for early-fall chinook in South Fork Clearwater River.
6. Estimates of the minimum percentage of spawners that strayed from their home stream for each release strategy in each stream.
7. Percentage that NPTH strays compose of spawners in non-target streams
8. Total redds in each reach surveyed
9. Time frequency of redd construction in each reach surveyed.
10. Percentage of total redds contained in discrete stream sections.
11. Estimated number of hatchery and natural spawners in each reach surveyed (Mark-recapture of fish from weirs).
12. Estimates of age and sex-specific maturity rates for each race, and possibly each treatment stream
13. Annual estimates of the percentage of carcasses that are less than 80% spawned in each stream.
14. Differential survival rate between subyearling and yearling smolts for fall chinook.
15. Estimates of the minimum percentage of spawners that strayed from their home stream for each release strategy in each stream.
16. Percentage that NPTH strays compose of spawners in non-target streams
17. Change in spawning time and age at maturity across generations of natural chinook in stream where NPTH strays constitute at least 10% of all spawners.

Screw Trapping • Ongoing • Spring Chinook
1. Time-frequency distribution of emigration.
2. Mean and 95% confidence interval, regression of mean length for each life stage and Julian day.
3. Estimate of the ratio of spring chinook salmon presmolt (fall) to smolt (spring) migrants passing the rotary-screw trap from each brood.
4. Difference in fall presmolt passage at the upper and lower traps in Lolo Creek.
5. Estimate of parr abundance, based on marked-to-unmarked ratio of fish arriving at the screw trap.
6. Estimate of survival from parr to smolting in each treatment stream.
7. Estimate of survival from emigration to Lower Granite Dam (McNary).

Habitat Surveys • 10 years • Spring Chinook
1. Comparison of weekly water temperatures and flows within and between streams.
2. Weekly water temperatures at the time and location of spawning and egg incubation within each stream.

Genetic Analysis • Ongoing • All stocks and Hatcheries
1. Annual gene frequencies for populations of natural spawners in each study stream.
2. Difference in gene frequencies between natural juveniles and natural adults of the same brood in each study stream.
3. Annual gene frequencies for populations of chinook salmon in each NPTH hatchery treatment, including Lyons Ferry Hatchery.

Harvest Monitoring • Ongoing • All Stocks
1. Estimated fraction of chinook salmon harvested by age and race each year (1) in the ocean and (2) within the Columbia River
2. Estimated number of chinook salmon harvested by age and race each year within the Clearwater River subbasin.
3. Estimated difference in hatchery :natural ratios in the catch for specific times, locations or gears within the Clearwater Basin.
4. Estimated mortality rate prior to spawning on fish that are caught and released by fisheries in the Clearwater Basin.
Proposer:
None
Proponent Orgs:
Nez Perce Tribe (Tribe)
Starting FY:
1983
Ending FY:
2017
BPA PM:
Stage:
Implementation - Project Status Report
Area:
Province Subbasin %
Mountain Snake Clearwater 100.00%
Purpose:
Artificial Production
Emphasis:
RM and E
Focal Species:
Chinook - Snake River Fall ESU (threatened)
Chinook - Snake River Spring/Summer
Chinook - Snake River Spring/Summer ESU (threatened)
Lamprey, Pacific
Steelhead - Snake River DPS (threatened)
Trout, Bull (threatened)
Species Benefit:
Anadromous: 100.0%   Resident: 0.0%   Wildlife: 0.0%
Special:
None

Cover photo

Figure Name: Cover

Document ID: P114726

Document: Spring Chinook Salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha Supplementation in the Clearwater Subbasin - 2008 Annual Report

Page Number: 1

Project: 1983-350-03

Contract: 40385

Overview map of Nez Perce Tribal Hatchery complex and treatment streams within the Clearwater River Subbasin.

Figure Name: Figure 1

Document ID: P114726

Document: Spring Chinook Salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha Supplementation in the Clearwater Subbasin - 2008 Annual Report

Page Number: 19

Project: 1983-350-03

Contract: 40385

The Nez Perce Tribal Hatchery NATURES S-Channel utilized for rearing juvenile Chinook salmon.

Figure Name: Figure 2

Document ID: P114726

Document: Spring Chinook Salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha Supplementation in the Clearwater Subbasin - 2008 Annual Report

Page Number: 22

Project: 1983-350-03

Contract: 40385

The Nez Perce Tribal Hatchery Conventional raceways utilized for rearing juvenile Chinook salmon.

Figure Name: Figure 3

Document ID: P114726

Document: Spring Chinook Salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha Supplementation in the Clearwater Subbasin - 2008 Annual Report

Page Number: 22

Project: 1983-350-03

Contract: 40385

The Nez Perce Tribal Hatchery Conventional semi-circular tanks utilized for rearing juvenile Chinook salmon.

Figure Name: Figure 4

Document ID: P114726

Document: Spring Chinook Salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha Supplementation in the Clearwater Subbasin - 2008 Annual Report

Page Number: 23

Project: 1983-350-03

Contract: 40385

Index and extensive redd survey areas located in the Lolo Creek drainage.

Figure Name: Figure 5

Document ID: P114726

Document: Spring Chinook Salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha Supplementation in the Clearwater Subbasin - 2008 Annual Report

Page Number: 25

Project: 1983-350-03

Contract: 40385

Index and extensive redd survey areas located in the Newsome Creek drainage.

Figure Name: Figure 6

Document ID: P114726

Document: Spring Chinook Salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha Supplementation in the Clearwater Subbasin - 2008 Annual Report

Page Number: 26

Project: 1983-350-03

Contract: 40385

Index spawning survey areas located in the Meadow Creek drainage.

Figure Name: Figure 7

Document ID: P114726

Document: Spring Chinook Salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha Supplementation in the Clearwater Subbasin - 2008 Annual Report

Page Number: 27

Project: 1983-350-03

Contract: 40385


Summary of Budgets

To view all expenditures for all fiscal years, click "Project Exp. by FY"

Expense SOY Budget Working Budget Contracted Amount Modified Contract Amount Expenditures *
FY2016 (Previous) $2,372,028 $2,372,028 $2,371,250 $2,371,250 $2,016,483

BiOp FCRPS 2008 (non-Accord) $2,372,028 $2,371,250 $2,371,250 $2,016,483
FY2017 (Current) $2,372,028 $2,372,028 $2,371,938 $2,371,938 $1,097,677

BiOp FCRPS 2008 (non-Accord) $2,372,028 $2,371,938 $2,371,938 $1,097,677
FY2018 (Next) $0 $0 $0 $0

BiOp FCRPS 2008 (non-Accord) $0 $0 $0 $0

* Expenditures data includes accruals and are based on data through 31-Mar-2017

Decided Budget Transfers  (FY2016 - FY2018)

Acct FY Acct Type Amount Fund Budget Decision Date
FY2016 Expense $2,349,087 From: BiOp FCRPS 2008 (non-Accord) FY16 Initial Planning Budgets - Expense 05/22/2015
FY2016 Expense $22,941 From: BiOp FCRPS 2008 (non-Accord) NPT ISS 05/28/2015
FY2017 Expense $2,372,028 From: BiOp FCRPS 2008 (non-Accord) FY17 SOY Budgets 06/02/2016

Pending Budget Decision?  No


Project Cost Share:

FY2016 1 %
FY2015 1 %
FY2014 0 %
FY2013 0 %
FY2012 4 %
FY2011 4 %
FY2010 4 %
FY2009 4 %
FY2008 4 %
FY2007 0 %
Fiscal Year Cost Share Partner Total Proposed
Contribution
Total Confirmed
Contribution
FY2015 US Bureau of Land Management (BLM) $13,500
FY2016 US Bureau of Land Management (BLM) $13,500

Contracts

The table below contains contracts with the following statuses: Active, Complete, History, Issued.
Expense Contracts:
Number Contractor Name Title Status Contracted Amount Dates
BPA-003705 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - Nez Perce Tribal Hatchery M&E Active $78,107 10/1/2007 - 9/30/2008
BPA-004303 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - Nez Perce Tribal Hatchery M&E Active $52,342 10/1/2008 - 9/30/2009
BPA-004962 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - NPT Hatchery M&E Active $53,613 10/1/2009 - 9/30/2010
BPA-005565 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - NPT Hatchery M&E Active $84,180 10/1/2006 - 9/30/2007
BPA-005697 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - NPT Hatchery M&E Active $104,927 10/1/2010 - 9/30/2011
BPA-006321 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - NPT Hatchery M&E Active $69,951 10/1/2011 - 9/30/2012
BPA-007676 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - NPT Hatchery M&E Active $88,175 10/1/2013 - 9/30/2014
BPA-008420 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - NPT Hatchery M&E Active $90,113 10/1/2014 - 9/30/2015
71157 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 1983-350-03 EXP NPTH M&E Issued $2,281,788 1/1/2016 - 12/31/2016
BPA-008941 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - NPT Hatchery M&E FY16 Active $89,462 10/1/2015 - 9/30/2016
75398 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 1983-350-03 EXP NPTH M&E Issued $2,335,738 1/1/2017 - 12/31/2017
BPA-009510 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - NPT Hatchery M&E Active $36,200 10/1/2016 - 9/30/2017



Annual Progress Reports
Expected (since FY2004):72
Completed:14
On time:14
Status Reports
Completed:46
On time:39
Avg Days Late:1

Earliest Subsequent           Accepted Count of Contract Deliverables
Contract Contract(s) Title Contractor Start End Status Reports Complete Green Yellow Red Total % Green and Complete Canceled
4414 25738, 30617, 36025, 40385, 45238, 50644, 55488, 60243, 63430, 67319, 71157, 75398 1983-350-3 NEZ PERCE TRIBAL HATCHERY - M & E Nez Perce Tribe 01/2001 01/2001 Issued 46 170 0 0 60 230 73.91% 0
BPA-005565 PIT Tags - NPT Hatchery M&E Bonneville Power Administration 10/2006 10/2006 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-003705 PIT Tags - Nez Perce Tribal Hatchery M&E Bonneville Power Administration 10/2007 10/2007 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-004303 PIT Tags - Nez Perce Tribal Hatchery M&E Bonneville Power Administration 10/2008 10/2008 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-004962 PIT Tags - NPT Hatchery M&E Bonneville Power Administration 10/2009 10/2009 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-005697 PIT Tags - NPT Hatchery M&E Bonneville Power Administration 10/2010 10/2010 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-006321 PIT Tags - NPT Hatchery M&E Bonneville Power Administration 10/2011 10/2011 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-007676 PIT Tags - NPT Hatchery M&E Bonneville Power Administration 10/2013 10/2013 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-008420 PIT Tags - NPT Hatchery M&E Bonneville Power Administration 10/2014 10/2014 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-008941 PIT Tags - NPT Hatchery M&E FY16 Bonneville Power Administration 10/2015 10/2015 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-009510 PIT Tags - NPT Hatchery M&E Bonneville Power Administration 10/2016 10/2016 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Project Totals 46 170 0 0 60 230 73.91% 0


Review: RME / AP Category Review

2008 FCRPS BiOp Workgroup Assessment

Assessment Number: 1983-350-03-BIOP-20101105
Project Number: 1983-350-03
Review: RME / AP Category Review
Proposal Number: RMECAT-1983-350-03
Completed Date: None
2008 FCRPS BiOp Workgroup Rating: Supports 2008 FCRPS BiOp
Comments: BiOp Workgroup Comments: No BiOp Workgroup comments

The BiOp RM&E Workgroups made the following determinations regarding the proposal's ability or need to support BiOp Research, Monitoring and Evaluation (RME) RPAs. If you have questions regarding these RPA association conclusions, please contact your BPA COTR and they will help clarify, or they will arrange further discussion with the appropriate RM&E Workgroup Leads. BiOp RPA associations for the proposed work are: (50.7 62.4 62.5 )
All Questionable RPA Associations () and
All Deleted RPA Associations (50.5 50.6 56.1 62.1 63.1 64.1 64.2 )
Proponent Response:

Independent Scientific Review Panel Assessment

Assessment Number: 1983-350-03-ISRP-20101015
Project: 1983-350-03 - Nez Perce Tribal Hatchery Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E)
Review: RME / AP Category Review
Proposal Number: RMECAT-1983-350-03
Completed Date: 12/17/2010
Final Round ISRP Date: 12/17/2010
Final Round ISRP Rating: Meets Scientific Review Criteria
Final Round ISRP Comment:
The proponents' responses were adequate. The minijack query was nicely addressed. Reviewers view the project favorably, but are very concerned about the low SARs observed to date. These are not values that will lead to recovery or sustainability. The ISRP’s request for additional clarity on this issue was perhaps misunderstood. This observation is not a policy issue. Understanding what bottlenecks exist and are contributing to low SARs and how they can be minimized is the job of proponents and reviewers alike. This is in everyone's best interests. If actions to address the low SARs are being taken within basin, the ISRP was interested in knowing more about the actions. If the low SARs are thought to be entirely due to downstream mortality factors, this calls into question the likelihood of reaching SARs and returning adult numbers identified in the NPT Hatchery Plan or the Clearwater Subbasin Plan.

It is also worth noting as a programmatic concern, that the NPT spring Chinook SAR goals do not match those of the Fish and Wildlife Program and Subbasin Plans; thus, the SAR goals need further examination. SAR goals for the NPT Hatchery are less than the subbasin goals and won't result in rebuilding or the creation of a self-sustaining population. A SAR of 0.4 may result in some harvestable fish, but it will not result in naturally sustainable runs. If the proponents are interesting in rebuilding fish, these SAR goals are not compatible.
First Round ISRP Date: 10/18/2010
First Round ISRP Rating: Response Requested
First Round ISRP Comment:
A response is requested on the following points (also, see additional discussion in comments below):

1. How will SARs increase (nearly an order of magnitude) under the present program to achieve program goals?

2. How are harvest goals (and present harvest actions in tributaries) to be reconciled with the rebuilding targets and schedules?

3. Need a discussion of minijacks.

4. Need additional interpretation of results for Spring Chinook.

Summary: This is an excellent proposal. It is clear that this continues to be a quality program. The proponents deserve a good deal of credit for the recent 5-year review Symposium and for the establishment of a new DFRM website on which selected information will be available.

The NPTH Goal is to increase the number of naturally spawning adults to achieve goals within 24 years (this timeline is consistent with the Council’s Fish and Wildlife Program). This should result in 4-6% SARs for spring-summer Chinook, 3% SARs for fall Chinook, and 4% SARs for steelhead as measured at Lower Granite Dam, within the next 24 years. However, presently SARs are about 1/10th this amount. Consequently, the proposal should describe how the 3-6% SAR goals for the various species are to be reached, when they are so much lower than that at present.

In a similar vein, how are the Subbasin Plan’s harvest goals to be accounted for (i.e., justified) when SARs are not indicative of rebuilding to target levels. What is the scientific basis for believing that a fishery for fall Chinook could be soon warranted on a substantial scale that would not be in conflict with the stated goal of the hatchery project that is to establish a natural spawning run of salmon? Allowing harvest impacts before reaching the project’s target rebuilding goals will reduce the number of fish in the system or require increasing overall hatchery production for the project. Either step will likely slow the local adaptation process of the naturally spawning salmon population and therefore will delay achievement of the project’s rebuilding goals.

Also relevant and needed is a discussion regarding minijacks, the abundance of which is being seen (i.e., by proposal 200203100) to be problematic in several ways in supplemented Chinook populations. The proposal includes no discussion of minijacking, its consequences, or potential management solutions.

The second concern deals with the reporting of project results. Proponents are to be commended for the detailed presentation. Results are fairly clearly presented for fall Chinook; however for spring Chinook, reviewers are inundated with fine detail without adequate interpretation.

1. Purpose, Significance to Regional Programs, Technical Background, and Objectives

This proposal seeks funding to continue monitoring and evaluation (M&E) of NPTH activities to:
1. Mark NPTH hatchery production with adipose fin clips, Coded-Wire Tags, and/or PIT tags;
2. Monitor the status and trends and life history diversity of Clearwater subbasin spring Chinook salmon and fall Chinook salmon including typical subyearling emigration versus yearling or holdover emigration strategy and associated adult returns;
3. Evaluate the effectiveness of the NPTH program at meeting production goals, stimulating Chinook salmon natural production, minimizing deleterious impacts to target and non-target populations, aiding in the recovery of ESA listed Snake River fall Chinook and maintaining genetic integrity;
4. Facilitate adaptive management of operational processes including innovative rearing strategies, variable stocking rates, and release locations; and
5. Report (electronically post) data and results. The primary regional data systems (PTAGIS, RMIS) will be provided tag data. Additional annual reports, metadata, and performance measure data will be available on the new DFRM website.

2. History: Accomplishments, Results, and Adaptive Management

The study’s results are shown in clear and thorough detail. While it has been an ongoing issue for ISRP reviewers to get proponents to adequately describe a project’s history, accomplishments, and the use of adaptive management, the NPT does a very good job of describing the project’s history and evolution, including how they went about solving unforeseen problems, mostly associated with low return of adults or with limited water supply. These are good and well described examples of adaptive management.

The project has gone through several phases. First was an initial building and troubleshooting phase where facilities and protocols were tested against the project’s goals. Next was a phase of refining the project’s objectives and refining the artificial production protocols, while attempting to reach the project’s production goals. The most recent stage has been one where the protocols are refined and the production goals are increasingly being reached. Thus, the project was implemented, refined, and now regularly approaches its production goals. Because the ultimate goal for the project is one of reaching sustainable natural production consistent with the subbasin and fishery management goals, the next phase of the project will need to focus much more on post-release survival, mortality factors, and performance of returning adults. The NPTH M&E project describes much of how this will be done.

The proponents’ minimal discussion of meanings and conclusions (which would constitute the study’s accomplishments) is appropriate, given the few years of data that are available thus far. Also, the rather new hatchery’s supplementation project being evaluated has only recently begun reaching production goals. The ISRP expects that in future cycles of review (and in other reports) the study will be providing conclusions about effects of the supplementation.

For example, SARs for the FCS and SCS components are roughly 0.1% and 0.3%, respectively. For natural production to be self-sustaining, SARs will have to increase by an order of magnitude. How can this be achieved? The next iteration of the project should start to address these issues and describe a plan for achieving them, otherwise, there will never be a termination date for the artificial production efforts on this project and the ultimate goals will never be achieved. Other issues in the new phase of the project include the high number of minijacks, the low SAR rate, and how tribal harvest goals are consistent with natural production goals, given the low SAR rate.

3. Project Relationships, Emerging Limiting Factors, and Tailored Questions for Type of Work (Hatchery, RME, Tagging)

Adequately covered.

4. Deliverables, Work Elements, Metrics, and Methods

Adequately covered.
Documentation Links:

Council Recommendation

Assessment Number: 1983-350-03-NPCC-20110125
Project: 1983-350-03 - Nez Perce Tribal Hatchery Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E)
Review: RME / AP Category Review
Proposal: RMECAT-1983-350-03
Proposal State: Pending BPA Response
Approved Date: 6/10/2011
Recommendation: Fund (Qualified)
Comments: Implement with condition through 2016: Implementation subject to regional hatchery effects evaluation process described in programmatic recommendation #4.
Conditions:
Council Condition #1 Programmatic Issue: RMECAT #4 Hatchery Effectiveness—.
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review

Legal Assessment (In-Lieu)

Assessment Number: 1983-350-03-INLIEU-20090521
Project Number: 1983-350-03
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Completed Date: 10/6/2006
In Lieu Rating: No Problems Exist
Cost Share Rating: None
Comment: Hatchery RM&E; although fishery managers authorized/required, assume okay since it is an FCRPS hatchery.

Capital Assessment

Assessment Number: 1983-350-03-CAPITAL-20090618
Project Number: 1983-350-03
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Completed Date: 2/27/2007
Capital Rating: Does Not Qualify for Capital Funding
Capital Asset Category: None
Comment: None

Independent Scientific Review Panel Assessment

Assessment Number: 1983-350-03-ISRP-20060831
Project: 1983-350-03 - Nez Perce Tribal Hatchery Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E)
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Completed Date: 8/31/2006
Final Round ISRP Date: None
Final Round ISRP Rating: Meets Scientific Review Criteria
Final Round ISRP Comment:
Technical and scientific background: This is a thorough and well-written proposal that documents the long history of the NPTH project including (somewhat between the lines!) the long interaction and dialogue between the ISRP and the project.

The current proposal accurately reflects many of the conclusions reached during previous reviews and is focused on implementing and monitoring Phase 1 of the three-phased, 20+ year project. Phase 1 is expected to take approximately 5 years; however, specific adult returns (i.e., benchmarks or biological triggers) have to be achieved to move the project into Phase II.

Sponsors provide substantial detail throughout the proposal and in the attached M&E Action Plan describing specific tasks and performance measures.

It would appear from this well-crafted proposal that the years of dialogue have paid off and that the systematic approach outlined in the proposal and M&E action plan are likely to yield much needed information on supplementation effects and results.

Relationships to other projects are well described.

This is a very expensive ($2 million/yr) effort to assess the performance of NATURES rearing and of this supplementation program. Prior ISRP comments specified that this M&E be done commensurate with a Phase 1 production level; however, it is difficult at this time to tease out if there should be any differences for M&E between the two phases.

Objectives, tasks, and M&E are well described including a detailed description of uncertainties, assumptions, and hypotheses.
Documentation Links:

Council Recommendation

Assessment Number: 1983-350-03-NPCC-20090924
Project: 1983-350-03 - Nez Perce Tribal Hatchery Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E)
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Approved Date: 10/23/2006
Recommendation: Fund
Comments:

Project Relationships: None

Name Role Organization
Sherman Sprague Project Lead Nez Perce Tribe
Bill Arnsberg Project Lead Nez Perce Tribe
Jay Hesse Supervisor Nez Perce Tribe
Jason Vogel Interested Party Nez Perce Tribe
Ed Larson (Inactive) Supervisor Nez Perce Tribe
Rebecca Johnson Project Lead Nez Perce Tribe
Bruce McLeod Interested Party Nez Perce Tribe
Katey Grange Env. Compliance Lead Bonneville Power Administration
Amy Mai Project Manager Bonneville Power Administration
Peter Lofy Supervisor Bonneville Power Administration