Views/Actions
Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program
RSS Feed for updates to Project 1991-073-00 - Idaho Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Follow this via RSS feed. Help setting up RSS feeds?

Project Summary

Project 1991-073-00 - Idaho Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E)
Project Number:
1991-073-00
Title:
Idaho Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E)
Summary:
The goal of the Idaho Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation Project (INPMEP) is to understand and predict the population dynamics and associated controlling factors of wild and natural anadromous salmonids that spawn upstream from Lower Granite Dam (LGR). This is long-term research that originated in the 1980s to determine effectiveness of habitat mitigation for steelhead and spring/summer Chinook in Idaho. This project assesses population characteristics, survival, and productivity.
Proposer:
None
Proponent Orgs:
Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) (Govt - State)
Starting FY:
1991
Ending FY:
2018
Stage:
Implementation - Project Status Report
Area:
Province Subbasin %
Mountain Snake Salmon 100.00%
Purpose:
Artificial Production
Emphasis:
RM and E
Focal Species:
Bass, Largemouth
Bass, Smallmouth
Chinook - Snake River Fall ESU (threatened)
Chinook - Snake River Spring/Summer
Chinook - Snake River Spring/Summer ESU (threatened)
Cutthroat Trout, Westslope
Freshwater Mussels
Kokanee
OBSOLETE-Carp, Common
OBSOLETE-Catfish
OBSOLETE-Crappie, Black
OBSOLETE-Crappie, White
OBSOLETE-Perch, Yellow
OBSOLETE-Pikeminnow, Northern
OBSOLETE-Trout, Brown
Steelhead - Snake River DPS (threatened)
Sturgeon, White - All Populations except Kootenai R. DPS
Trout, Brook
Trout, Bull (threatened)
Trout, Interior Redband
Trout, Rainbow
Whitefish, Mountain
Species Benefit:
Anadromous: 100.0%   Resident: 0.0%   Wildlife: 0.0%
Special:
None

Photo: Ron Roberts

Figure Name: Cover

Document ID: P114291

Document: Idaho Natural Production Monitoring & Evaluation Project Annual Report

Page Number: 1

Project: 1991-073-00

Contract: 40873

Location of sites where wild spring/summer Chinook salmon carcasses were collected in 2008.

Figure Name: Figure 1

Document ID: P114291

Document: Idaho Natural Production Monitoring & Evaluation Project Annual Report

Page Number: 24

Project: 1991-073-00

Contract: 40873


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 *
FY2017 (Previous) $1,693,370 $1,693,370 $1,693,360 $1,693,360 $1,833,956

BiOp FCRPS 2008 (non-Accord) $1,693,370 $1,693,360 $1,693,360 $1,833,956
FY2018 (Current) $1,693,370 $1,693,370 $14,325 $14,325 $155,951

BiOp FCRPS 2008 (non-Accord) $1,693,370 $14,325 $14,325 $155,951
FY2019 (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-Oct-2017

Decided Budget Transfers  (FY2017 - FY2019)

Acct FY Acct Type Amount Fund Budget Decision Date
FY2017 Expense $1,693,370 From: BiOp FCRPS 2008 (non-Accord) FY17 SOY Budgets 06/02/2016
FY2018 Expense $1,693,370 From: BiOp FCRPS 2008 (non-Accord) FY18 SOY Budgets 07/17/2017

Pending Budget Decision?  No


No Project Cost Share

FY2017 0 %
FY2016 0 %
FY2015 0 %
FY2014 68 %
FY2013 68 %
FY2012 68 %
FY2011 68 %
FY2010 0 %
FY2009 70 %
FY2008 70 %
FY2007 70 %
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
23363 SOW Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) 1991-073-00 EXP IDAHO NATURAL PRODUCTION M&E History $731,534 7/1/2005 - 6/30/2006
28739 SOW Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) 1991-073-00 NATURAL PRODUCTION M&E History $472,783 7/1/2006 - 1/31/2007
31117 SOW Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) 1991-073-00 NATURAL PRODUCTION M&E History $603,419 2/1/2007 - 1/31/2008
BPA-008440 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - Idaho Nat'l Production M&E Active $19,712 10/1/2014 - 9/30/2015
BPA-008909 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - Idaho Nat'l Production M&E Active $2,293 10/1/2015 - 9/30/2016
75491 SOW Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) 1991-073-00 EXP IDAHO NATURAL PRODUCTION MONITORING - 2017 Issued $1,690,505 2/1/2017 - 1/31/2018
BPA-009590 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - Idaho Nat'l Production M&E Active $2,855 10/1/2016 - 9/30/2017
BPA-010053 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - Idaho Nat'l Production M&E Active $14,325 10/1/2017 - 9/30/2018



Annual Progress Reports
Expected (since FY2004):18
Completed:11
On time:11
Status Reports
Completed:52
On time:41
Avg Days Early: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
5862 18667, 23363, 28739, 31117, 36423, 40873, 45995, 50975, 55703, 59833, 63971, 67977, 71488, 75491 1991-073-00 IDAHO NATURAL PRODUCTION & MONITROING Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) 07/2001 07/2001 Pending 51 210 28 0 9 247 96.36% 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
Project Totals 51 210 28 0 9 247 96.36% 0


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

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:
199005500-ISMES  
   
   
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.
   

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.
Conditions:
Council Condition #1 Programmatic Issue: RMECAT #4 Hatchery Effectiveness—subject to regional hatchery effects evaluation process
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review

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

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:

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.

Project Relationships: None

Name Role Organization
Timothy Copeland Technical Contact Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG)
Daniel Schill (Inactive) Supervisor Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG)
William Schrader Project Lead Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG)
Brenda Aguirre Env. Compliance Lead Bonneville Power Administration
June Johnson Interested Party Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG)
Tyler Johnson Interested Party Burns-Paiute Tribe
Paul Krueger (Inactive) Supervisor Bonneville Power Administration
Lance Hebdon Technical Contact Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG)
Russell Scranton Project Manager Bonneville Power Administration
Paul Kline Interested Party Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG)
Eli Felts Project Lead Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG)