Views/Actions
Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program
RSS Feed for updates to Project 1991-028-00 - Pit Tagging Wild Chinook Follow this via RSS feed. Help setting up RSS feeds?

Project Summary

Project 1991-028-00 - Pit Tagging Wild Chinook
Project Number:
1991-028-00
Title:
Pit Tagging Wild Chinook
Summary:
OVERALL PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT: Assess the migrational characteristics and estimate parr-to-smolt survival for Snake River wild spring/summer Chinook salmon smolts at Lower Granite Dam. Characterize parr and smolt survival and movement out of natal rearing areas of selected streams and examine the relationships between fish movement, environmental conditions within the streams, and weather and climate data. Collect parr-to-smolt growth information on previously PIT-tagged wild Chinook salmon parr at Lower Granite Dam each spring.
Proposer:
None
Proponent Orgs:
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Govt - Federal)
Starting FY:
1991
Ending FY:
2018
Stage:
Implementation - Project Status Report
Area:
Province Subbasin %
Mountain Snake Salmon 100.00%
Purpose:
Hydrosystem
Emphasis:
RM and E
Focal Species:
Chinook - Snake River Spring/Summer ESU (threatened)
Steelhead - Snake River DPS (threatened)
Species Benefit:
Anadromous: 100.0%   Resident: 0.0%   Wildlife: 0.0%
Special:
None

No photos have been uploaded yet for this project.

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) $490,880 $490,880 $489,247 $489,247 $492,955

BiOp FCRPS 2008 (non-Accord) $490,880 $489,247 $489,247 $492,955
FY2017 (Current) $490,880 $490,880 $490,846 $490,846 $485,078

BiOp FCRPS 2008 (non-Accord) $490,880 $490,846 $490,846 $485,078
FY2018 (Next) $490,880 $490,880 $500,430 $500,430 $0

BiOp FCRPS 2008 (non-Accord) $490,880 $500,430 $500,430 $0

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

Decided Budget Transfers  (FY2016 - FY2018)

Acct FY Acct Type Amount Fund Budget Decision Date
FY2016 Expense $490,880 From: BiOp FCRPS 2008 (non-Accord) FY16 SOY June Uploads 06/26/2015
FY2017 Expense $490,880 From: BiOp FCRPS 2008 (non-Accord) FY17 SOY Budgets 06/02/2016
FY2018 Expense $490,880 From: BiOp FCRPS 2008 (non-Accord) FY18 SOY Budgets 07/17/2017

Pending Budget Decision?  No


No Project Cost Share

FY2016 0 %
FY2015 0 %
FY2014 0 %
FY2013 0 %
FY2012 0 %
FY2011 0 %
FY2010 0 %
FY2009 0 %
FY2008 0 %
FY2007 0 %
Fiscal Year Cost Share Partner Total Proposed
Contribution
Total Confirmed
Contribution

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-003601 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - PIT Tagging Wild Chinook Active $18,164 10/1/2007 - 9/30/2008
BPA-004105 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - PIT Tagging Wild Chinook Active $30,766 10/1/2008 - 9/30/2009
BPA-004981 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - PIT Tagging Wild Chinook Active $25,900 10/1/2009 - 9/30/2010
BPA-005540 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - PIT Tagging Wild Chinook Active $47,626 10/1/2006 - 9/30/2007
BPA-005633 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - PIT Tagging Wild Chinook Active $39,339 10/1/2010 - 9/30/2011
BPA-006254 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - PIT Tagging Wild Chinook Active $30,934 10/1/2011 - 9/30/2012
BPA-006950 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - PIT Tagging Wild Chinook Active $31,998 10/1/2012 - 9/30/2013
BPA-007724 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - PIT Tagging Wild Chinook Active $27,781 10/1/2013 - 9/30/2014
BPA-008381 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - PIT Tagging Wild Chinook Active $27,828 10/1/2014 - 9/30/2015
BPA-008910 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - PIT Tagging Wild Chinook Active $27,862 10/1/2015 - 9/30/2016
46273 REL 130 SOW National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 1991-028-00 EXP PIT TAGGING WILD CHINOOK Issued $462,740 4/1/2017 - 3/31/2018
BPA-009591 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - PIT Tagging Wild Chinook Active $28,106 10/1/2016 - 9/30/2017
BPA-010068 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - PIT Tagging Wild Chinook Active $9,550 10/1/2017 - 9/30/2018



Annual Progress Reports
Expected (since FY2004):15
Completed:15
On time:15
Status Reports
Completed:48
On time:45
Avg Days Early:5

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
5619 21961, 26583, 31849, 36414, 41226, 46273 REL 5, 46273 REL 19, 46273 REL 38, 46273 REL 62, 46273 REL 80, 46273 REL 96, 46273 REL 111, 46273 REL 130 1991-028-00 PIT TAGGING WILD CHINOOK National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 06/2001 06/2001 Pending 48 104 11 1 1 117 98.29% 1
BPA-005540 PIT Tags - PIT Tagging Wild Chinook Bonneville Power Administration 10/2006 10/2006 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-003601 PIT Tags - PIT Tagging Wild Chinook Bonneville Power Administration 10/2007 10/2007 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-004105 PIT Tags - PIT Tagging Wild Chinook Bonneville Power Administration 10/2008 10/2008 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-004981 PIT Tags - PIT Tagging Wild Chinook Bonneville Power Administration 10/2009 10/2009 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-005633 PIT Tags - PIT Tagging Wild Chinook Bonneville Power Administration 10/2010 10/2010 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-006254 PIT Tags - PIT Tagging Wild Chinook Bonneville Power Administration 10/2011 10/2011 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-006950 PIT Tags - PIT Tagging Wild Chinook Bonneville Power Administration 10/2012 10/2012 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-007724 PIT Tags - PIT Tagging Wild Chinook Bonneville Power Administration 10/2013 10/2013 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-008381 PIT Tags - PIT Tagging Wild Chinook Bonneville Power Administration 10/2014 10/2014 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-008910 PIT Tags - PIT Tagging Wild Chinook Bonneville Power Administration 10/2015 10/2015 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-009591 PIT Tags - PIT Tagging Wild Chinook Bonneville Power Administration 10/2016 10/2016 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-010068 PIT Tags - PIT Tagging Wild Chinook Bonneville Power Administration 10/2017 10/2017 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Project Totals 48 104 11 1 1 117 98.29% 1


Review: RME / AP Category Review

2008 FCRPS BiOp Workgroup Assessment

Assessment Number: 1991-028-00-BIOP-20101105
Project Number: 1991-028-00
Review: RME / AP Category Review
Proposal Number: RMECAT-1991-028-00
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: ( 50.5 53.2 )
All Questionable RPA Associations ( ) and
All Deleted RPA Associations (50.1 50.3 52.2 53.3 54.1 54.12 54.6 54.7 54.8 55.1 55.2)
Proponent Response:

Independent Scientific Review Panel Assessment

Assessment Number: 1991-028-00-ISRP-20101015
Project: 1991-028-00 - Pit Tagging Wild Chinook
Review: RME / AP Category Review
Proposal Number: RMECAT-1991-028-00
Completed Date: 12/17/2010
Final Round ISRP Date: 12/17/2010
Final Round ISRP Rating: Meets Scientific Review Criteria (Qualified)
Final Round ISRP Comment:
Qualification: The ISRP recommends that within the next year the project proponents 1) develop a proposed modeling and analysis outline for the data and 2) develop and test several critical hypotheses by integrating data across years.

Summary: This long-term project has provided important information regarding the early life history characteristics and survival data for wild Snake River spring Chinook. Key significant findings include parr to smolt survival rates, growth rates, migration timing, and intra- and inter- annual variation in movements between habitats. The information gained continues to be of value to managers and other decision-makers. The ISRP commends the project proponents for the well-prepared summary of accomplishments and major results over the history of the project.

While gathering these long-term data may be worthwhile in itself, the ISRP suggests that to fully utilize these data, the next logical steps are 1) start to develop a modeling and analysis outline for the data and 2) start framing and testing a few critical hypotheses. The ISRP noted that the proponents have started to do this type of analysis for a five year set of data by examining the variation in survival based on size (see Zabel and Achord. 2004. Vol. 85(3) Ecology). The ISRP suggests that the data should be explored more fully and that more such hypotheses can be tested. For example:

• The results of Paulsen and Fisher (2001) were valuable in pointing out the effect of rearing habitat “type” and condition on parr to smolt survival. What is the next step as a logical follow-up?
• Project staff sees a lot of pre-smolt movement during winter. Is this an important pattern? We suspect that mid-winter movement is movement of last resort because the winter habitat utilized at the onset of winter is no longer suitable, and these fish seldom survive.
• The project presents only relative parr densities - how do these compare with actual densities?
• Relevance to climate change is mentioned, but nothing specific formulated for testing.

Other ISRP comments:

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

Proponents describe in reasonable detail how the project relates to the 2008 BiOp, Fish and Wildlife Program, MERR, HLI, etc. The significance of the project to regional programs is clearly laid out and in a general sense it is evident that the information gained is of value to managers and other decision makers. The technical background section is very well done and uses the available literature to support justification for this project. The Objectives are measurable with specifically defined metrics but are mostly about what data will be collected, not hypothesis-driven objectives.

2. History: Accomplishments, Results, and Adaptive Management

An excellent summary is given of accomplishments and major results over the history of the project. This is a long ongoing project that has provided important information regarding the early life history characteristics and survival data for wild Snake River spring Chinook. Several significant findings include parr to smolt survival rates, growth rates, migration timing, and intra and inter annual variation in movements between habitats.

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

This project has coordinated well with many other projects, and these are specifically identified in the proposal.

The proponents indicate that they are taking into account significant future changes in limiting factors such as climate change and water quality, but nothing specific is proposed for testing or evaluation.

4. Deliverables, Work Elements, Metrics, and Methods

There is a good track record of technical reports and publications. Methods seem appropriate, and project staff seems well positioned to continue to incorporate new technology (e.g., smaller tags) as it becomes available. The improvements in detection rates may provide an opportunity to reduce sampling effort if target precision levels can be met with less sampling effort. Indeed, one of the strongest reasons to continue the project is that such new technology is becoming available so rapidly.

The study is well designed with state of art methods. The few null hypotheses listed in the proposal (e.g., there are no significant differences in timing among years, etc.) are okay as far as they go but are not adequate for explaining the observed variation. It is not clear that there are more specific hypotheses that the proponents intend to test.
First Round ISRP Date: 10/18/2010
First Round ISRP Rating: Meets Scientific Review Criteria (Qualified)
First Round ISRP Comment:
Qualification: The ISRP recommends that within the next year the project proponents 1) develop a proposed modeling and analysis outline for the data and 2) develop and test several critical hypotheses by integrating data across years.

Summary: This long-term project has provided important information regarding the early life history characteristics and survival data for wild Snake River spring Chinook. Key significant findings include parr to smolt survival rates, growth rates, migration timing, and intra- and inter- annual variation in movements between habitats. The information gained continues to be of value to managers and other decision-makers. The ISRP commends the project proponents for the well-prepared summary of accomplishments and major results over the history of the project.

While gathering these long-term data may be worthwhile in itself, the ISRP suggests that to fully utilize these data, the next logical steps are 1) start to develop a modeling and analysis outline for the data and 2) start framing and testing a few critical hypotheses. The ISRP noted that the proponents have started to do this type of analysis for a five year set of data by examining the variation in survival based on size (see Zabel and Achord. 2004. Vol. 85(3) Ecology). The ISRP suggests that the data should be explored more fully and that more such hypotheses can be tested. For example:

• The results of Paulsen and Fisher (2001) were valuable in pointing out the effect of rearing habitat “type” and condition on parr to smolt survival. What is the next step as a logical follow-up?
• Project staff sees a lot of pre-smolt movement during winter. Is this an important pattern? We suspect that mid-winter movement is movement of last resort because the winter habitat utilized at the onset of winter is no longer suitable, and these fish seldom survive.
• The project presents only relative parr densities - how do these compare with actual densities?
• Relevance to climate change is mentioned, but nothing specific formulated for testing.

Other ISRP comments:

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

Proponents describe in reasonable detail how the project relates to the 2008 BiOp, Fish and Wildlife Program, MERR, HLI, etc. The significance of the project to regional programs is clearly laid out and in a general sense it is evident that the information gained is of value to managers and other decision makers. The technical background section is very well done and uses the available literature to support justification for this project. The Objectives are measurable with specifically defined metrics but are mostly about what data will be collected, not hypothesis-driven objectives.

2. History: Accomplishments, Results, and Adaptive Management

An excellent summary is given of accomplishments and major results over the history of the project. This is a long ongoing project that has provided important information regarding the early life history characteristics and survival data for wild Snake River spring Chinook. Several significant findings include parr to smolt survival rates, growth rates, migration timing, and intra and inter annual variation in movements between habitats.

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

This project has coordinated well with many other projects, and these are specifically identified in the proposal.

The proponents indicate that they are taking into account significant future changes in limiting factors such as climate change and water quality, but nothing specific is proposed for testing or evaluation.

4. Deliverables, Work Elements, Metrics, and Methods

There is a good track record of technical reports and publications. Methods seem appropriate, and project staff seems well positioned to continue to incorporate new technology (e.g., smaller tags) as it becomes available. The improvements in detection rates may provide an opportunity to reduce sampling effort if target precision levels can be met with less sampling effort. Indeed, one of the strongest reasons to continue the project is that such new technology is becoming available so rapidly.

The study is well designed with state of art methods. The few null hypotheses listed in the proposal (e.g., there are no significant differences in timing among years, etc.) are okay as far as they go but are not adequate for explaining the observed variation. It is not clear that there are more specific hypotheses that the proponents intend to test.
Documentation Links:

Council Recommendation

Assessment Number: 1991-028-00-NPCC-20101130
Project: 1991-028-00 - Pit Tagging Wild Chinook
Review: RME / AP Category Review
Proposal: RMECAT-1991-028-00
Proposal State: Pending BPA Response
Approved Date: 6/10/2011
Recommendation: Fund (Qualified)
Comments: Implement through FY 2016. See presumptive path discussion in Programmatic Recommendation no. 10.
Conditions:
Council Condition #1 Programmatic Issue: RMECAT #10 PIT tags and related tags—See presumptive path discussion
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review

Legal Assessment (In-Lieu)

Assessment Number: 1991-028-00-INLIEU-20090521
Project Number: 1991-028-00
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Completed Date: 10/6/2006
In Lieu Rating: No Problems Exist
Cost Share Rating: None
Comment: PIT tagging, data support management decisions for FCRPS operations.

Capital Assessment

Assessment Number: 1991-028-00-CAPITAL-20090618
Project Number: 1991-028-00
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: 1991-028-00-ISRP-20060831
Project: 1991-028-00 - Pit Tagging Wild Chinook
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:
This is a high priority project deserving support. Significant peer reviewed publications are continuing to be produced by this project.

As the proposal indicates, with the development of additional PIT-tag detection capabilities at dams, research biologists can now estimate survival from parr to smolt stages. The proposal makes a good case for continuing this project to make these estimates, which may allow in-season management decisions regarding timing of hydropower system operations within season (spill, flow, and transportation) to provide the most benefits for juvenile wild Chinook.

In the 2003 Mainstem/Systemwide Review, the ISRP concluded that, "This is a good smolt-monitoring project that provides invaluable basic data for management decisions affecting the stocks involved." This conclusion still applies.
Documentation Links:

Council Recommendation

Assessment Number: 1991-028-00-NPCC-20090924
Project: 1991-028-00 - Pit Tagging Wild Chinook
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Approved Date: 10/23/2006
Recommendation: Fund
Comments: Budget reductions not specific (i.e, Funding rolled back to FY 2006 level). Project to be implemented with reduced scope.

Project Relationships: None

Name Role Organization
Deborah Docherty Project Manager Bonneville Power Administration
Israel Duran Env. Compliance Lead Bonneville Power Administration
Gordon Axel Project Lead National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Beth Sanderson (Inactive) Supervisor National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Dorothy Welch Supervisor Bonneville Power Administration