Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program
RSS Feed for updates to Project 1991-055-00 - Natures Rearing Enhancement Systems Project Follow this via RSS feed. Help setting up RSS feeds?

Project Summary

Project 1991-055-00 - Natures Rearing Enhancement Systems Project

Please Note: This project is the product of one or more merges and/or splits from other projects. Historical data automatically included here are limited to the current project and previous generation (the “parent” projects) only. The Project Relationships section details the nature of the relationships between this project and the previous generation. To learn about the complete ancestry of this project, please review the Project Relationships section on the Project Summary page of each parent project.

Project Number:
Natures Rearing Enhancement Systems Project
Proponent Orgs:
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Govt - Federal)
Starting FY:
Ending FY:
Province Subbasin %
Basinwide - 100.00%
Artificial Production
RM and E
Focal Species:
Species Benefit:
Anadromous: 100.0%   Resident: 0.0%   Wildlife: 0.0%
BiOp Association:

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"

To see more detailed project budget information, please visit the "Project Budget" page

No Decided Budget Transfers

Pending Budget Decision?  No

Actual Project Cost Share

Current Fiscal Year — 2020
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
There are no cost share summaries to display from previous years.


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
548 REL 1 SOW National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 91055, THE NATURES PROJECT (NATURAL REARING ENHANCEMENTS SYS) Terminated $474,711 3/1/2000 - 2/28/2001

Annual Progress Reports
Expected (since FY2004):0
On time:0
Status Reports
On time:0
Avg Days Late:None

Historical from: 1991-073-00
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
5862 18667, 23363, 28739, 31117, 36423, 40873, 45995, 50975, 55703, 59833, 63971, 67977, 71488, 75491, 78413, 81352 1991-073-00 IDAHO NATURAL PRODUCTION & MONITROING Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) 07/2001 07/2001 Closed 62 260 14 0 13 287 95.47% 0
BPA-008440 PIT Tags - Idaho Nat'l Production M&E Bonneville Power Administration 10/2014 10/2014 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-008909 PIT Tags - Idaho Nat'l Production M&E Bonneville Power Administration 10/2015 10/2015 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-009590 PIT Tags - Idaho Nat'l Production M&E Bonneville Power Administration 10/2016 10/2016 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-010053 PIT Tags - Idaho Nat'l Production M&E Bonneville Power Administration 10/2017 10/2017 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-010716 PIT Tags - Idaho Nat'l Production M&E Bonneville Power Administration 10/2018 10/2018 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Project Totals 62 260 14 0 13 287 95.47% 0

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: Fast Track ISRP Review 2010

Independent Scientific Review Panel Assessment

Assessment Number: 1991-073-00-ISRP-20100623
Project: 1991-073-00 - Idaho Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E)
Review: Fast Track ISRP Review 2010
Completed Date: None
First Round ISRP Date: 2/24/2010
First Round ISRP Rating: Response Requested
First Round ISRP Comment:
A response is needed in the form of a revised narrative. It is not clear to the ISRP how INPMEP has been modified to accomplish the basinwide strategy for monitoring. Please make clear to the ISRP how INPMEP has been modified to meet the strategy formulated in the fall 09 RM&E workshop. In particular clarify how populations will be selected for high-precision (fish-in/fish/out) monitoring and summarize the populations in the MPGs that have high precision data. Explain the relevant pros and cons of transferring the snorkel survey monitoring to ISMES.

The ISRP notes that CV (coefficient of variation) is not usually associated with precision of data, but with the variation associated with a state of nature. That is, salmon abundance across years has a CV, fall steelhead parr length has a CV. These are descriptions of the state of variation. They are not appropriate to determine confidence intervals. Crawford and Rumsey (2009) reference Carlile et al. (2008), which makes recommendations for coefficients of variation for estimates of total spawning escapement. The reference is to standard error of the estimate, not to variation in the population. More importantly, the statistical and biological basis for the recommendation in Carlile et al. (2008) has not been reviewed. The justification that the standard represents a realistic goal for planning because it corresponds to an acceptable risk (one year of one stock in six) of failing to label a stock of concern when warranted appears to be arbitrary. The observation that the standard has proven to be attainable for many escapement estimation studies does not mean that this is the appropriate data standard. Further justification for sample size targets is required.

1. Technical Justification, Program Significance and Consistency, and Project Relationships
Until now, the project has been intended to monitor and evaluate the status and trends of wild Chinook spring/summer salmon and summer steelhead populations in Idaho. According to the proposal, the Idaho Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation Project (INPMEP) was designed to "provide information to managers and to regional decision-making processes. The Snake River stocks of steelhead and spring/summer Chinook salmon still have significant natural reproduction and thus are the focal species for this project’s investigations. The overall project goal is to monitor the abundance, productivity, distribution, and stock-specific life history characteristics in order to assess and annually report the status of naturally-produced steelhead trout and Chinook salmon populations in Idaho." Project goals are clear and well-justified in the context of the BiOp, the pertinent subbasin plans, and other enabling agreements. A number of significant changes to the project are proposed in the current document that would modify the project's scope. Relationships with other projects are complex and are clearly presented in the proposal.

2. Project History and Results
The proposal describes project history in a helpful manner. It discusses how the snorkel survey program has undergone several changes and now will be transferred to another project. A discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of the transfer would be helpful. The ISRP commends the investigators for publishing their results in the open literature.

One task was not accomplished: "Sub-objective 3.2: Locate areas of high STHD fry density. This task was not completed due to logistical reasons." It would help the ISRP to understand the logistical problems.

3. Objectives, Work Elements, and Methods
Changes proposed for the project include that the genetic component will be performed by the new genetic stock identification project at Lower Granite Dam (project 201002600), as recommended in an earlier ISRP review. Another proposed change is to “narrow the scope of INPMEP to focus on spring/summer Chinook and transfer steelhead monitoring elements to ISMES. Beginning in 2010, INPMEP will coordinate summarization and reporting of redd count and carcass survey data, which supports the strategy for extensive monitoring of Chinook. For extensive steelhead monitoring, the recommended option is genetic stock identification at Lower Granite Dam. However, the technique would take at least five years to develop the first productivity data point. IDFG recommends that snorkel surveys continue as another extensive monitoring technique for steelhead. We further recommend transferring this element to Idaho Steelhead Monitoring and Evaluation Studies (project 199005500)." They elaborate that because these projects also use the experimental design, INPMEP provides similar data from other watersheds that complements and extends the spatial coverage of data from these projects. Because data from snorkel surveys are most important for steelhead monitoring, investigators recommend transferring this element to Idaho Steelhead Monitoring and Evaluation Studies (project 199005500). The ISRP does not oppose this change but would like to see a more detailed discussion of the relevant pros and cons.

The proposal states "By understanding the transitions between stages and associated controlling factors, we hope to achieve a mechanistic understanding of population dynamics." The ISRP would be helped by a fuller explanation.

The project provides for annual VSP (abundance and productivity) monitoring and less frequent spatial structure monitoring based on spawning ground surveys and surrogates for them. Although a response is needed, the proposal employs competent methods, adequate metrics, and qualified people.
Documentation Links:
Review: RME / AP Category Review

Council Recommendation

Assessment Number: 1991-073-00-NPCC-20101202
Project: 1991-073-00 - Idaho Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E)
Review: RME / AP Category Review
Proposal: RMECAT-1991-073-00
Proposal State: Pending BPA Response
Approved Date: 6/10/2011
Recommendation: Fund (Qualified)
Comments: Implement with condition through 2016 per April-May 2010 Council decision for Fast Track projects: Implementation subject to regional hatchery effects evaluation process described in programmatic recommendation #4.
Council Condition #1 Programmatic Issue: RMECAT #4 Hatchery Effectiveness—subject to regional hatchery effects evaluation process

2008 FCRPS BiOp Workgroup Assessment

Assessment Number: 1991-073-00-BIOP-20101105
Project Number: 1991-073-00
Review: RME / AP Category Review
Proposal Number: RMECAT-1991-073-00
Completed Date: None
2008 FCRPS BiOp Workgroup Rating: Response Requested
Comments: BiOp Workgroup Comments: Paired juvenile monitoring should be coordinated with CHaMP habitat monitoring watersheds, if possible, and comparable data from other watersheds may be used to support modeling. However, extensive monitoring (including snorkeling for chinook parr density) is outside of BiOp requirements. Please clarify the value of the ongoing snorkle surveys and the intended uses of the data for the project.

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: (50.4 50.5 50.6 62.5 )
All Questionable RPA Associations ( ) and
All Deleted RPA Associations ( 50.8 63.2)
Proponent Response:
Project needs coordination with other PIT tagging through PIT Plan.   PIT tagging protocols used by this program were designed to meet specific research objectives as described in the ISMES study design, which has passed several critical reviews by ISRP.  In the past we have provided PIT tag support to other RM&E programs such as CSS when approached by these programs to increase efficiency and provide more cost effective ways to use limited resources. IDFG as not been contacted by anyone to provide input or help develop a regional PIT-tag plan.  If (and when) a proceess is developed to draft a regional PIT plan,  IDFG will fully engage in its development.
What is the value of ongoing snorkle surveys?   Extensive and intensive snorkel surveys for juvenile abundance (parr density) and spatial structure were considered critical at the RM&E workshops. In addition, and in lieu of redd counts, parr densities are the only measure for steelhead spatial structure for most populations. They are also a surrogate index for steelhead adult abundance at smaller spatial scales. We record information for steelhead, Chinook, and resident fish which contributes to over 30 years of trend monitoring for these species. These snorkel surveys monitor juvenile abundance, productivity, and spatial structure, which are all required by the BiOp.
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review

Council Recommendation

Assessment Number: 1991-073-00-NPCC-20090924
Project: 1991-073-00 - Idaho Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E)
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Approved Date: 10/23/2006
Recommendation: Fund
Comments: ISRP fundable in part. Do not fund the genetic work component as per ISRP recommendation.

Independent Scientific Review Panel Assessment

Assessment Number: 1991-073-00-ISRP-20060831
Project: 1991-073-00 - Idaho 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: Meets Scientific Review Criteria - In Part
Final Round ISRP Comment:
The sponsors responded to clarify the primary questions raised by the ISRP. The adequacy and depth of the clarification varied across the questions raised.

In response to the ISRP questions of whether the project could be scaled to provide only the data needed for regional RME needs, and how past uses of the data justify continuation, the sponsors provided a succinct and sufficient response. The ISRP recognizes that the Idaho Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation project has been instrumental in providing critical data for assessing the status and trends of salmonids (principally spring and summer Chinook) in the Salmon River subbasin.

The response provided by the sponsors clarified how their objectives relate to recovery planning in general. It is clear that valuable data has been generated and that the project has added value to these data in the past through appropriate analyses. The ISRP appreciates the perspective concerning the project changing due to information demanded by regional decision-makers.

In response to questions on the need for additional genetic and life history data on Chinook salmon, the sponsors respond, "The details of life history and genetic structure of Chinook salmon populations in Idaho are not well-known on the scales required for population-level recovery planning and monitoring. INPMEP should be the main source of this information for groups like the ICBTRT. Many of the population delineations made by the ICBTRT were made using professional judgment and not backed by hard data."

The ISRP recognizes that microsatellite and SNP genotypes are not available for all the spring and summer Chinook in the Snake River region. At the same time NOAA Fisheries and others have been using microsatellite genotyping to evaluate a number of salmon management problems in the Snake River system. Sponsors did not show how any of this new data had altered the understanding of Chinook salmon metapopulation structure and how additional data was essential to management decisions. It is not clear if this data would do little more than reinforce the existing understanding of population structure. While more data would almost always be useful, sponsors have not identified what management decisions hinge on the data. This should be made evident before undertaking further genotyping to define Chinook salmon metapopulations. The ISRP's intent is that the management questions and the sponsors' methods and tasks to address them be made explicit. The purpose is to help ensure that the data collected is the most useful. Further explanation of the need for describing the fine-scale genetic structure of Chinook salmon in Idaho is necessary before this component of the project is justified.

The sponsors clarify that they are not involved in the investigation of hatchery effects on natural spawners and natural populations, but that data they collect on natural populations is used by projects that are conducting those investigations. This response is appreciated by the ISRP, and the importance of that effort is understood.

The sponsors' clarification of objective 1) Describe the population structure of Snake River spring/summer Chinook salmon, and 4) Evaluate life cycle survival and the freshwater productivity/production of Snake River spring/summer Chinook salmon, were unconvincing. The ISRP comment on 1 is found in the paragraph above on genetic and life-history investigations. For objective 4, the primary purpose of engaging in life cycle survival estimation is to support tributary habitat restoration effectiveness monitoring. The proposal is insufficient to evaluate whether this is the suitable vehicle to accomplish that task. The proposal does not discuss tributary habitat restoration in the subbasin and provide a connection between this project and those efforts. The sponsors' clarification of objective 2 and 3, estimation of juvenile and adult abundance and distribution is sufficient.

Fundable in part to conduct the essential juvenile (parr and smolt) abundance data collections and the essential adult redd and age distribution information. The genetics work component is not scientifically justified in the proposal or response.
Documentation Links:

Legal Assessment (In-Lieu)

Assessment Number: 1991-073-00-INLIEU-20090521
Project Number: 1991-073-00
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Completed Date: 10/6/2006
In Lieu Rating: Problems May Exist
Cost Share Rating: 3 - Does not appear reasonable
Comment: M&E for chinook populations; fishery managers authorized/required to perform as well; need confirmation that cost share sufficient.

Capital Assessment

Assessment Number: 1991-073-00-CAPITAL-20090618
Project Number: 1991-073-00
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Completed Date: 2/27/2007
Capital Rating: Does Not Qualify for Capital Funding
Capital Asset Category: None
Comment: None

Project Relationships: This project Merged From 1991-073-00 effective on 10/31/2020
Relationship Description: PM approved by Russ Scranton and Jonathan McCloud. Manager approval by Kristen Jule and Dave Kaplowe.

Name Role Organization
Gregory Baesler (Inactive) Project Manager Bonneville Power Administration