Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program
RSS Feed for updates to Project 1990-005-01 - Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Follow this via RSS feed. Help setting up RSS feeds?

Project Summary

Project 1990-005-01 - Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E)
Project Number:
1990-005-01
Title:
Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E)
Summary:
The Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation Project provides information to tribal, state and federal fisheries managers by monitoring the status and trends in the abundance, distribution, movement and survival of summer steelhead and spring Chinook salmon during adult migration, spawning, rearing and juvenile migration in the Umatilla River Drainage. We evaluate these trends in relation to environmental, ecological, and anthropogenic factors.
Proposer:
None
Proponent Orgs:
Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR) (Tribe)
Starting FY:
1990
Ending FY:
2032
BPA PM:
Stage:
Implementation - Project Status Report
Area:
Province Subbasin %
Columbia Plateau Umatilla 100.00%
Purpose:
Artificial Production
Emphasis:
RM and E
Focal Species:
Bass, Largemouth
Bass, Smallmouth
Carp, Common
Catfish
Chinook - All Populations
Chinook - Mid-Columbia River Spring ESU
Chinook - Snake River Spring/Summer
Chinook - Snake River Spring/Summer ESU
Coho - Lower Columbia River ESU
Coho - Unspecified Population
Crappie, Black
Crappie, White
Freshwater Mussels
Lamprey, Pacific
Lamprey, Western Brook
Perch, Yellow
Pikeminnow, Northern
Steelhead - Middle Columbia River DPS
Steelhead - Snake River DPS
Sturgeon, White - All Populations except Kootenai R. DPS
Trout, Bull
Trout, Interior Redband
Trout, Rainbow
Walleye
Whitefish, Mountain
Species Benefit:
Anadromous: 100.0%   Resident: 0.0%   Wildlife: 0.0%
Tags:
None
Special:
None

Cover photo

Figure Name: Cover

Document ID: P123568

Document: Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation Project: 2010 Annual Progress Report

Page Number: 1

Project: 1990-005-01

Contract: 52461

Secondary Channel, Meacham Creek RM 3, 2009, image by Craig Contor

Figure Name: Chapter 1 Cover

Document ID: P123568

Document: Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation Project: 2010 Annual Progress Report

Page Number: 14

Project: 1990-005-01

Contract: 52461

Major irrigation diversions, reservoirs, and tributaries in the Umatilla River Basin.

Figure Name: Figure 1-2

Document ID: P123568

Document: Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation Project: 2010 Annual Progress Report

Page Number: 19

Project: 1990-005-01

Contract: 52461

Coyote Creek (foreground) and the North Fork of the Umatilla River canyon (image by Craig Contor).

Figure Name: Figure 1-3

Document ID: P123568

Document: Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation Project: 2010 Annual Progress Report

Page Number: 20

Project: 1990-005-01

Contract: 52461

Umatilla River near river mile 38

Figure Name: Figure 1-4

Document ID: P123568

Document: Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation Project: 2010 Annual Progress Report

Page Number: 21

Project: 1990-005-01

Contract: 52461

Westland Diversion near river mile 26

Figure Name: Figure 1-5

Document ID: P123568

Document: Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation Project: 2010 Annual Progress Report

Page Number: 21

Project: 1990-005-01

Contract: 52461

North Fork Umatilla River RM 4 (image by Craig Contor)

Figure Name: Chapter 2 Cover

Document ID: P123568

Document: Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation Project: 2010 Annual Progress Report

Page Number: 24

Project: 1990-005-01

Contract: 52461

Levi Jones surveying summer steelhead redds in the Umatilla River (image by Jeremy Wolf).

Figure Name: Chapter 3 Cover

Document ID: P123568

Document: Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation Project: 2010 Annual Progress Report

Page Number: 36

Project: 1990-005-01

Contract: 52461

Summer steelhead redd survey sites, 2010 (see Table 3-1)

Figure Name: Figure 3-1

Document ID: P123568

Document: Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation Project: 2010 Annual Progress Report

Page Number: 40

Project: 1990-005-01

Contract: 52461

Spring Chinook redd and carcass survey reaches, 2010 (see Table 3-1)

Figure Name: Figure 3-2

Document ID: P123568

Document: Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation Project: 2010 Annual Progress Report

Page Number: 40

Project: 1990-005-01

Contract: 52461

Darryl Thompson working the Meacham Creek rotary smolt trap (image by Craig Contor).

Figure Name: Chapter 4 Cover

Document ID: P123568

Document: Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation Project: 2010 Annual Progress Report

Page Number: 56

Project: 1990-005-01

Contract: 52461

Jerimiah Bonifer examining a fish captured in the Meacham Creek rotary trap (image by Darryl Thompson).

Figure Name: Figure 4-3

Document ID: P123568

Document: Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation Project: 2010 Annual Progress Report

Page Number: 62

Project: 1990-005-01

Contract: 52461

Tribal fisherman, Eric Broncheau, on the Umatilla River (photographer David Wolf).

Figure Name: Chapter 5 Cover

Document ID: P123568

Document: Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation Project: 2010 Annual Progress Report

Page Number: 90

Project: 1990-005-01

Contract: 52461

Jerimiah Bonifer and Ken Loffnik radio tagging a spring Chinook salmon at Three Mile Falls Dam (image by Craig Contor).

Figure Name: Figure 6-1

Document ID: P123568

Document: Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation Project: 2010 Annual Progress Report

Page Number: 102

Project: 1990-005-01

Contract: 52461

Radio tagged hatchery steelhead showing antenna (image by Craig Contor).

Figure Name: Figure 6-2a

Document ID: P123568

Document: Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation Project: 2010 Annual Progress Report

Page Number: 102

Project: 1990-005-01

Contract: 52461

Radio tagged hatchery steelhead showing antenna (image by Craig Contor).

Figure Name: Figure 6-2b

Document ID: P123568

Document: Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation Project: 2010 Annual Progress Report

Page Number: 102

Project: 1990-005-01

Contract: 52461

Study area map showing locations of fixed site receivers within the Umatilla River Basin in 2010.

Figure Name: Figure 6-3

Document ID: P123568

Document: Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation Project: 2010 Annual Progress Report

Page Number: 103

Project: 1990-005-01

Contract: 52461

Fixed site receiver at the mouth of Birch Creek RKM 77.

Figure Name: Figure 6-4

Document ID: P123568

Document: Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation Project: 2010 Annual Progress Report

Page Number: 104

Project: 1990-005-01

Contract: 52461

Jakob Settle mobile tracking on the lower Umatilla River (image by Craig Contor).

Figure Name: Figure 6-5

Document ID: P123568

Document: Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation Project: 2010 Annual Progress Report

Page Number: 106

Project: 1990-005-01

Contract: 52461

Mobile tracking on the upper Umatilla River (image by Kaylyn Costi).

Figure Name: Figure 6-6

Document ID: P123568

Document: Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation Project: 2010 Annual Progress Report

Page Number: 107

Project: 1990-005-01

Contract: 52461

Mobile tracking by fixed wing plane (image by Cody Barnes).

Figure Name: Figure 6-7

Document ID: P123568

Document: Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation Project: 2010 Annual Progress Report

Page Number: 107

Project: 1990-005-01

Contract: 52461

Migration Routes at Westland, Feed, and Stanfield Diversions.

Figure Name: Figure 6-12

Document ID: P123568

Document: Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation Project: 2010 Annual Progress Report

Page Number: 115

Project: 1990-005-01

Contract: 52461

Diagram of operations at Dillon, Westland, Feed and Stanfield diversion dam.

Figure Name: Figure 6-14

Document ID: P123568

Document: Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation Project: 2010 Annual Progress Report

Page Number: 118

Project: 1990-005-01

Contract: 52461

Maxwell diversion 2010.

Figure Name: Figure 6-19a

Document ID: P123568

Document: Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation Project: 2010 Annual Progress Report

Page Number: 123

Project: 1990-005-01

Contract: 52461

Westland diversion 2010.

Figure Name: Figure 6-19b

Document ID: P123568

Document: Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation Project: 2010 Annual Progress Report

Page Number: 123

Project: 1990-005-01

Contract: 52461

Feed diversion 2010.

Figure Name: Figure 6-20a

Document ID: P123568

Document: Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation Project: 2010 Annual Progress Report

Page Number: 124

Project: 1990-005-01

Contract: 52461

Stanfield diversion 2010.

Figure Name: Figure 6-20b

Document ID: P123568

Document: Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation Project: 2010 Annual Progress Report

Page Number: 124

Project: 1990-005-01

Contract: 52461

Birch Creek diversion 2010.

Figure Name: Figure 6-21a

Document ID: P123568

Document: Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation Project: 2010 Annual Progress Report

Page Number: 125

Project: 1990-005-01

Contract: 52461

McKay Creek diversion 2010.

Figure Name: Figure 6-21b

Document ID: P123568

Document: Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation Project: 2010 Annual Progress Report

Page Number: 125

Project: 1990-005-01

Contract: 52461

Adult summer steelhead scale projection (image by Craig Contor).

Figure Name: Chapter 7 Cover

Document ID: P123568

Document: Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation Project: 2010 Annual Progress Report

Page Number: 159

Project: 1990-005-01

Contract: 52461

Scales collected from the preferred area of a hatchery steelhead by Kaylyn Reznicek (image by Jerimiah Bonifer).

Figure Name: Figure 7-1

Document ID: P123568

Document: Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation Project: 2010 Annual Progress Report

Page Number: 160

Project: 1990-005-01

Contract: 52461


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 *
FY2018 (Previous) $905,682 $893,427 $837,553 $837,553 $775,909

Fish Accord - LRT - Umatilla $893,427 $837,553 $837,553 $775,909
FY2019 (Current) $940,261 $891,725 $891,725 $552,136

Fish Accord - LRT - Umatilla $940,261 $891,725 $891,725 $552,136
FY2020 (Next) $989,153 $989,153 $0 $0 $0

Fish Accord - LRT - Umatilla $989,153 $0 $0 $0

* Expenditures data includes accruals and are based on data through 31-May-2019

Decided Budget Transfers  (FY2018 - FY2020)

Acct FY Acct Type Amount Fund Budget Decision Date
FY2018 Expense $943,419 From: Fish Accord - LRT - Umatilla FY18 Initial Planning Budgets (WS, CTUIR, YN, CRITFC, CCT, ID) 2/10/2017 02/13/2017
FY2018 Expense $37,737 To: Fish Accord - LRT - Umatilla CTUIR Establish FY18 budget for 2012-010-00 Accord Administration 08/21/2017
FY2018 Expense $12,255 To: Fish Accord - LRT - Umatilla Accord Budget Transfer (CTUIR, CCT) 7/30/2018 07/30/2018
FY2019 Expense $1,090,318 From: Fish Accord - LRT - Umatilla Accord Extensions (Umatilla Tribe) 10/1/2018 10/01/2018
FY2019 Expense $150,057 To: Fish Accord - LRT - Umatilla Accord budget transfer (CTUIR) 1/7/2019 01/07/2019
FY2020 Expense $989,153 From: Fish Accord - LRT - Umatilla Accord Extensions (Umatilla Tribe) 10/1/2018 10/01/2018

Pending Budget Decision?  No


Actual Project Cost Share

Current Fiscal Year — 2019   DRAFT
Cost Share Partner Total Proposed Contribution Total Confirmed Contribution
There are no project cost share contributions to show.
Previous Fiscal Years
Fiscal Year Total Contributions % of Budget
2018 $33,490 4 %
2017 $33,490 4 %
2016 $33,490 4 %
2015
2014 $41,341 5 %
2013
2012 $22,035 3 %
2011
2010
2009 $95,200 13 %
2008 $247,000 30 %
2007 $0 0 %

Contracts

The table below contains contracts with the following statuses: Active, Complete, History, Issued.
* "Total Contracted Amount" column includes contracted amount from both capital and expense components of the contract.
Expense Contracts:
Number Contractor Name Title Status Total Contracted Amount Dates
182 REL 1 SOW Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR) 199000501 UMATILLA BASIN NATURAL PROD. MONITOR AND EVAL. Terminated $431,030 1/1/2000 - 12/31/2000
182 REL 2 SOW Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR) 1990-005-01 UMATILLA BASIN NATURAL PRODUCTION M&E Terminated $597,409 10/1/2000 - 9/30/2001
BPA-004440 Bonneville Power Administration PIT tags- Umatilla Natural Production M&E Active $10,829 10/1/2008 - 9/30/2009
BPA-004975 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - Umatilla Natural Production M&E Active $10,419 10/1/2009 - 9/30/2010
BPA-005700 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - Umatilla Basin Nat. Prod. M&E Active $8,606 10/1/2010 - 9/30/2011
52461 SOW Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR) 1990-005-01 EXP UMATILLA NATURAL PRODUCTION M&E History $735,236 3/1/2011 - 2/29/2012
BPA-006340 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - Umatiila Basin Nat. Prod. M&E Active $7,650 10/1/2011 - 9/30/2012
56620 SOW Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR) 1990-005-01 EXP UMATILLA NATURAL PRODUCTION M&E History $763,225 3/1/2012 - 2/28/2013
BPA-006957 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - Umatilla Basin Nat'l Prod. M&E Active $9,286 10/1/2012 - 9/30/2013
61878 SOW Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR) 1990-005-01 EXP UMATILLA NATURAL PRODUCTION M&E FY 13 History $880,939 3/1/2013 - 2/28/2014
BPA-007721 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - Umatilla Basin Nat'l Prod. M&E Active $9,258 10/1/2013 - 9/30/2014
BPA-008377 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - Umatilla Basin Nat'l Prod. M&E Active $13,141 10/1/2014 - 9/30/2015
BPA-008861 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - Umatilla Basin Natural Production M&E Active $13,224 10/1/2015 - 9/30/2016
BPA-009520 Bonneville Power Administration PIT tags- Umatilla Natural Production M&E 2017 Active $13,353 10/1/2016 - 9/30/2017
BPA-010032 Bonneville Power Administration PIT tags- Umatilla Natural Production M&E 2018 Active $13,354 10/1/2017 - 9/30/2018
73982 REL 38 SOW Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR) 1990-005-01 EXP UMATILLA NATURAL PRODUCTION M&E FY18 Issued $824,199 3/1/2018 - 2/28/2019
BPA-010784 Bonneville Power Administration PIT tags- Umatilla Natural Production M&E 2019 Active $16,390 10/1/2018 - 9/30/2019
73982 REL 68 SOW Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR) 1990-005-01 EXP UMATILLA NATURAL PRODUCTION M&E FY19 Issued $875,335 3/1/2019 - 2/29/2020



Annual Progress Reports
Expected (since FY2004):24
Completed:19
On time:19
Status Reports
Completed:77
On time:52
Avg Days Late:2

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
4115 20655, 25826, 32038, 37011, 41603, 47014, 52461, 56620, 61878, 65117, 68451, 71769, 73982 REL 9, 73982 REL 38, 73982 REL 68 1990-005-01 UMATILLA BASIN NATURAL PRODUCTION MONITORING Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR) 03/2001 03/2001 Issued 55 197 2 0 10 209 95.22% 2
BPA-004440 PIT tags- Umatilla Natural Production M&E Bonneville Power Administration 10/2008 10/2008 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
41827 46273 REL 2, 46273 REL 24, 46273 REL 45, 46273 REL 63 199000501 EXP UMATILLA RIVER STEELHEAD RADIO TRACKING-NMFS National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 04/2009 04/2009 Closed 22 21 0 0 2 23 91.30% 0
BPA-004975 PIT Tags - Umatilla Natural Production M&E Bonneville Power Administration 10/2009 10/2009 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-005700 PIT Tags - Umatilla Basin Nat. Prod. M&E Bonneville Power Administration 10/2010 10/2010 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-006340 PIT Tags - Umatiila Basin Nat. Prod. M&E Bonneville Power Administration 10/2011 10/2011 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-006957 PIT Tags - Umatilla Basin Nat'l Prod. M&E Bonneville Power Administration 10/2012 10/2012 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-007721 PIT Tags - Umatilla Basin Nat'l Prod. M&E Bonneville Power Administration 10/2013 10/2013 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-008377 PIT Tags - Umatilla Basin Nat'l Prod. M&E Bonneville Power Administration 10/2014 10/2014 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-008861 PIT Tags - Umatilla Basin Natural Production M&E Bonneville Power Administration 10/2015 10/2015 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-009520 PIT tags- Umatilla Natural Production M&E 2017 Bonneville Power Administration 10/2016 10/2016 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-010032 PIT tags- Umatilla Natural Production M&E 2018 Bonneville Power Administration 10/2017 10/2017 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-010784 PIT tags- Umatilla Natural Production M&E 2019 Bonneville Power Administration 10/2018 10/2018 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Project Totals 77 218 2 0 12 232 94.83% 2


The table content is updated frequently and thus contains more recent information than what was in the original proposal reviewed by ISRP and Council.

Review: RME / AP Category Review

Council Recommendation

Assessment Number: 1990-005-01-NPCC-20110124
Project: 1990-005-01 - Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E)
Review: RME / AP Category Review
Proposal: RMECAT-1990-005-01
Proposal State: Pending BPA Response
Approved Date: 6/10/2011
Recommendation: Fund (In Part)
Comments: Implement through 2016, with the exception of Objective 3 and Deliverable 7 of Objective 4 per ISRP’s review. Implementation also conditioned on the regional hatchery effects evaluation process described in programmatic recommendation #4.
Conditions:
Council Condition #1 Programmatic Issue: RMECAT #4 Hatchery Effectiveness—subject to regional hatchery effects evaluation process

Independent Scientific Review Panel Assessment

Assessment Number: 1990-005-01-ISRP-20101015
Project: 1990-005-01 - Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E)
Review: RME / AP Category Review
Proposal Number: RMECAT-1990-005-01
Completed Date: 12/17/2010
Final Round ISRP Date: 12/17/2010
Final Round ISRP Rating: Meets Scientific Review Criteria - In Part
Final Round ISRP Comment:
In Part: Deliverable 7 and Objective 3 do not meet scientific criteria due to lack of information that was requested by the ISRP. It does not appear that the proponents will actually be conducting work related to Deliverable 7 and Objective 3, even though they were included in the proposal. Rather, this work will be conducted by project 1984-024-01 (Umatilla Outmigration).

The proponents clarified their role in the Umatilla IMW project. They will coordinate with the major proponents of the IWM work, Projects 1984-024-01 (Umatilla Outmigration) and 2009-014-00 (Biomonitoring) and provide them status and trend data in support of the IMW project. The proponents of this project did not clearly indicate that they will be performing the habitat work called for in Deliverable 7 which states "Conduct habitat and related biological surveys to evaluate the effectiveness of habitat restoration activities." Therefore, Deliverable 7 is not scientifically justified for this project.

The ISRP requested more detail on Objective 3, "Assess salmonid diversity." This objective, which apparently is a part of the IMW study, reported no deliverables in the initial proposal and none were forthcoming in the response. With this lack of detail the ISRP is unable to evaluate the objective and so must deem it not to be justifiable for this project. The proponents referred the ISRP to the major proponents of the IMW project for the details of objectives 3 and 4. The details of these objectives and deliverable 7 were presented satisfactorily in the response of the proponents of project 1984-024-01 (Umatilla Outmigration).

The ISRP requested a more detailed summary of results. The proponent did not provide a summary but instead referred the ISRP to annual reports. Unfortunately, due to the time constraints imposed on the ISRP in their initial review of projects and in review of responses, we were unable to carefully examine the annual reports.
First Round ISRP Date: 10/18/2010
First Round ISRP Rating: Response Requested
First Round ISRP Comment:
A number for issues need to be addressed by the proponents. The most important are: 1) a more detailed summary of results, especially since the last project review, needs to be provided, 2) the proponents should clearly explain this project’s role in the Integrated Model Watershed (IMW) work in the Umatilla Basin, 3) more detail on Objective 3 needs to be provided, and 4) study design, background, methods, metrics, and data analysis for accomplishing Objective 4 and Deliverable 7 need elaboration and clarification. The proposal would benefit from separation of status and trend monitoring objectives and IMW objectives.

This project provides critical information about the natural production of steelhead and Chinook salmon in the Umatilla River basin. The data generated can be used to assess the effects of habitat restoration, flow restoration, and hatchery supplementation on populations of wild fish. In addition, it should provide important data by which to judge the new integrated hatchery supplementation strategies, whereby two different groups (Conservation and Harvest) of smolts are produced from natural vs. hatchery parents, respectively. This supplementation strategy may interact with flow and habitat restoration to create different benefits depending on these other two driving variables.

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

The project is consistent with the NPPC Fish and Wildlife Program and priority RM&E Objectives in the Umatilla Subbasin Plan, and addresses the natural production component of the Umatilla Hatchery Master Plan which was developed collaboratively with ODFW. A Comprehensive RM&E plan was developed by CTUIR and its regional collaborators. The proponents propose to co-operate in the IMW project to evaluate effectiveness of habitat restoration actions in Umatilla basin tributaries, although their role is not entirely clear.

Monitoring and evaluation of salmon status and trends in the Umatilla Basin certainly is well justified and the proponents have outlined a comprehensive approach for this effort. The objectives address important elements that should be entailed in an M&E program, including returns of hatchery and naturally spawning adult, outmigrant abundance and survival, tribal harvest, and passage upriver. The objectives and technical background information are comprehensive, and appear sound. Missing from the proposal, however, is monitoring trends in juvenile abundance. The proponents should explain why parr abundance won’t be measured.

A confusing aspect of this proposal is that it apparently has components pertaining to routine, on-going status and trend monitoring, evaluation of habitat effectiveness under the IMW program, and other habitat effectiveness assessments (Deliverable 7). The ongoing status and trends monitoring is encompassed by Objectives 1 and 2, and meet scientific criteria.

The IMW work apparently is divided among at least two projects, this one and Umatilla Juvenile Salmonid Outmigration and Survival (1989-024-01). The Outmigration project appears to have the greatest responsibility for conduct of the IMW work. The proponents of this proposal should clearly explain this project’s role in the IMW work. What data will it collect? What analyses will it perform? Which of the deliverables in this proposal pertain to the IMW project? Is it just Deliverable 3? Why wasn’t the IMW work consolidated into one proposal?

One challenging aspect of the IMW work is comparison of results from the various subbasins (reference and treatment), each of which has a suite of different flow, habitat, and supplementation treatments. As such, there is not a simple treatment-control structure to the IMW study design. Formal model selection might be used with the various response variables (e.g., smolt output) to separate the effects of these three main treatment factors among subbasins. The proponents should address this issue.

Objective 3, “Assess salmonid diversity,” requires more detail. What are the Deliverables for Objective 3? What life histories will be assessed, and how will the assessment be done?

The description of Objective 4 is “Quantify the benefits of habitat actions, flow augmentation, hatchery releases, and mainstem facility operations on adults returns, natural production and juvenile rearing,” with an accompanying Deliverable 7 which pertains to habitat effectiveness evaluations. This is an exceedingly broad and complex objective. Do the proponents intend on doing all of the work entailed in this objective by themselves and if so how will it be done? As the proposal now stands, it is unclear how Objective 4 will be accomplished. Deliverable 7, a component of Objective 4, is equally perplexing. It states “Conduct habitat and related biological surveys to evaluate the effectiveness of habitat restoration activities. The study design will be similar to that outlined in the Comprehensive M&E Plan but is currently begin refined through BPA project 2009-014-00 and will be coordinated with the Umatilla Intensively Monitored Watershed Project 1989-024-01.” The proponents provide no further explanation of how this deliverable will be achieved. If a study design exists, even in preliminary form, it should have been presented in the proposal (not simply referenced as the Comprehensive M&E plan) along with background, methods, metrics, and data analysis approaches. Objective 4 and Deliverable 7 are not scientifically justifiable because they lack these important elements.

2. History: Accomplishments, Results, and Adaptive Management

Based on its scale and duration, this project is likely to have produced significant results documenting status and trends of salmon in the Umatilla basin. The project has been ongoing since 1992, providing long-term data, but there was no mention of the main results from these data (only accomplishments were briefly listed), or whether these data had been published in peer-reviewed form. These results apparently are presented in other reports which the ISRP had no time to review. Analysis of the data for publication, and feedback from outside reviewers (i.e., outside of the region), can help refine ideas and analyses that feed back to improve monitoring and management.

The results presented in the proposal pertain primarily to products of EDT analyses and trends in adult returns of hatchery and naturally produced steelhead, and naturally produced spring Chinook, but only through 2004. It would have been useful if the proponents had summarized, in a similar way, data and interpretation pertaining to each of the project objectives. What have the main results shown, and how are they being used in management?

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

This project links to many others – both the four projects within the Umatilla River subbasin, and others outside he Umatilla Basin. The project is an important link to others in the basin, since it provides information on natural production of salmon and steelhead, and data generated can be used to assess the current integrated hatchery strategy (although this was not presented as an objective).

The proponents indirectly address emerging factors by continuing to monitor the status and trends of salmon and steelhead in the Umatilla Basin and thus provide information to assist managers in their assessments of emerging threats. A recent report has suggested that climate change will be an important emerging limiting factor for steelhead. This project will provide data to inform some of those ongoing changes, and how supplementation and habitat restoration may interact with it to affect steelhead and salmon.

4. Deliverables, Work Elements, Metrics, and Methods

The deliverables, methods, and metrics pertaining to status and trend monitoring were described very succinctly, are scientifically sound, and should yield suitable data for analysis.

As commented on above, Objective 4 and Deliverable 7 lack sufficient detail to permit a scientific review. Their breadth and complexity require a more thorough explanation of study design, background, methods, metrics, and data analysis. This projects role in the IMW work should be clarified.
Documentation Links:
  • Proponent Response (11/15/2010)

2008 FCRPS BiOp Workgroup Assessment

Assessment Number: 1990-005-01-BIOP-20101105
Project Number: 1990-005-01
Review: RME / AP Category Review
Proposal Number: RMECAT-1990-005-01
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: ( 52.2 50.6)
All Questionable RPA Associations ( ) and
All Deleted RPA Associations (50.8 64.2)
Proponent Response:
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review

Council Recommendation

Assessment Number: 1990-005-01-NPCC-20090924
Project: 1990-005-01 - Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E)
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Approved Date: 10/23/2006
Recommendation: Fund
Comments: The project sponsors are to work with the Council and others to structure an ISRP/Council review of the coordinated subbasin activities in the Umatilla at some point in the next two years. Hold to scope of FY 2006.

Independent Scientific Review Panel Assessment

Assessment Number: 1990-005-01-ISRP-20060831
Project: 1990-005-01 - Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E)
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Completed Date: 8/31/2006
Final Round ISRP Date: None
Final Round ISRP Rating: Does Not Meet Scientific Review Criteria
Final Round ISRP Comment:
The key question of the proposal evaluation remains: given past and future efforts will this work provide useful and science-based M&E results? In general, the answer seems positive, if correctly focused, but despite a somewhat detailed response, the impression is that tasks are confused.

No progress reports were included, although some additional data were provided. Nonetheless, the key recruitment analyses and required basic evaluations of life-stage limiting factors remain unreported, at least in the response. Such analysis would point to the key elements of fisheries science and management, where actions may be derived based on stock status and trends. For example, Chilcote (2003) suggested wild steelhead in the Umatilla had recruits per spawner values that were lowered in the presence of hatchery steelhead. Do results of this project refute or agree with his relationships?

The sponsors agreed it is essential that the Council facilitate a targeted review of the Umatilla programs within two years. The investments in this watershed, particularly in flow augmentation, but also hatchery and habitat work, demand a prioritization that this response seems to largely dismiss. The management domains, critical uncertainties, and life history phase relationships presented in Figure 1 all relate to the same subbasin vision and goals, and represent a reasonable starting point for M&E, and from which clear testable hypotheses should be developed. It is difficult to suggest whether there is too much or not enough M&E present here until such review, and until available results are analyzed effectively, and in relation to the good work of the subbasin planning exercise.

The ISRP needs to see specific objectives with measurable endpoints to provide a science review. See also related comments on the suite of proposals from this subbasin: 198343600, 198802200, 198902700, 19871001, and 19871002. In summary, there is a need for a Umatilla program review, and within that, a need to define clearly the role of this project in directing management activities within the subbasin. Funding should be qualified on the ability to make that tie. This work is central to the whole effort of fisheries and habitat management in the subbasin. It needs to provide data and inform when to release water, when to truck, etc.
Documentation Links:

Legal Assessment (In-Lieu)

Assessment Number: 1990-005-01-INLIEU-20090521
Project Number: 1990-005-01
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Completed Date: 10/6/2006
In Lieu Rating: Problems May Exist
Cost Share Rating: 2 - May be reasonable
Comment: M&E for Umatilla Basin fisheries; so fishery managers authorized/required (BPA projects as cost share excluded from percentage summary).

Capital Assessment

Assessment Number: 1990-005-01-CAPITAL-20090618
Project Number: 1990-005-01
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Completed Date: 2/27/2007
Capital Rating: Does Not Qualify for Capital Funding
Capital Asset Category: None
Comment: None

Project Relationships: None

Name Role Organization
Jesse Schwartz (Inactive) Interested Party Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR)
Gary James Interested Party Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR)
Julie Burke Administrative Contact Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR)
Craig Contor Project Lead Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR)
Gene Shippentower Supervisor Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR)
Tracy Hauser Project Manager Bonneville Power Administration
John Skidmore Supervisor Bonneville Power Administration
Jerimiah Bonifer Interested Party Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR)
Travis Kessler Env. Compliance Lead Bonneville Power Administration
Andrew Wildbill Interested Party Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR)