Comment:

The project produces high quality products, is responsive to feedback, and is a critical resource for the Basin. The ISRP encourages this project, which uses PIT tags, and the Statistical Support for Salmonid Survival Studies project, which uses coded wire tags (CWT), to examine differences in SAR results (see Programmatic Comments).

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

This is a long-running project to measure survival of smolts as they traverse the hydrosystem and subsequent SARs. Many projects in the basin rely on and coordinate with the CSS to provide tagged fish for specific projects. The overall objective is to link stages of salmon life cycle to factors influencing survival and to identify how these factors affect smolt-to-adult return rates. This project has an observational study design and the data are intended to apply to management questions including hydropower operations, hatchery evaluations, and habitat management

It is unclear how successful efforts have been to identify opportunities to coordinate marking activities. What are the barriers to more coordination and cooperation for tagging?

2. Results and Adaptive Management

Data and analyses from the project have influenced passage operations related to smolt transportation and spill for fish passage. Adaptive management is occurring in the sense that project life-cycle analyses are being used to compare EIS alternatives. It is not clear how the CSS is made aware of the data needs for adaptive management programs elsewhere in the basin. If there are data gaps that are critical for adaptive management, perhaps the CSS should be part of the planning group looking forward, if one does not already exist.

3. Methods: Project Relationships, Work Types, and Deliverables

The proposal mentions strengthening data and analyses on several fronts that could involve other projects related to delayed and latent mortality, hydropower effects on SARS, tributary productivity related to SARs, additional populations, density dependence in downstream passage, and more. The question of whether there are any plans to include lamprey and sturgeon in life cycle studies is of interest in the region.

Work products are reviewed on an annual basis by the ISAB and are high quality. The CSS is very responsive to the ISAB's suggestions for revisions to their project.

Qualification: This project should continue to undergo regular ISAB review. This project continues to perform its basic functions and produce annual reports and specific products to address a wide range of management questions. The annual report and many of these products are reviewed separately by the ISAB. The CSS estimates survival rates over the smolt-to-adult portion of the life cycle of spring and summer Chinook salmon and steelhead. The resulting data set has become increasingly valuable as data for more years has been added to address passage questions. Although this project undergoes frequent ISAB review, a more complete proposal than the one presented is necessary for a scientific evaluation by the ISRP. Having a more completely documented proposal form with scientific methodologies outlined is also important as a public record for the Fish and Wildlife Program. It would be beneficial to provide more details in the proposal including a project history with significant accomplishments, a detailed technical background section and information on metrics and methods. The proposal contains many typographic errors. Fortunately, most CSS products do not have this deficiency.

The CSS, SMP and FPC projects are integrated with each other.  A flow chart illustrating the operational interaction of these three projects has been included in the ISRP response to the Smolt Monitoring Project by Non-Federal Agencies. The same  flow chart has been included in this response by reference. 100% marking of hatchery production groups of steelehad and spring chinook utilized in this study does not occur in the CSS. Mark group size for the CSS study is determined by the number of marks required to achieve desired confidence intervals on the parameters estimated in the study objectives and study design. Coordination and collaboration with other marking efforts in the region is and has been an objective of the CSS and SMP studies. FPC personnel invest a significant amount each year in achieving that objective.

1. 1.      The ISRP understands that this project, FPC and CSS are all working together, but an explanation is requested. The ISRP would like to see a description and a diagram, or flow chart, illustrating how the elements are working together.

The Smolt Monitoring by Non-Federal Entities, # 198712700, and the Comparative Survival Study, #199602000, (CSS) and the Fish Passage Center, #199403300, are all joint projects of the regional state, federal and tribal fishery managers. As joint projects of the regional fishery managers, the contracts are administrated by the Pacific States Marine Fishery Commission (PSMFC). These regional fishery managers collaborate together on the design and plan for implementation of the Smolt Monitoring Program (SMP) and the Comparative Survival Study. The Fish Passage Center is charged with the implementation, oversight and reporting of these two regional monitoring programs according to the direction and decisions of the regional fishery managers. The regional fishery managers have established two technical committees that oversee these two monitoring projects. The Comparative Survival Study Oversight Committee oversees the CSS study, and the Fish Passage Advisory Committee oversees the Smolt Monitoring Program.  These two committees are comprised of technical representatives of the state, federal and tribal fishery managers. Since the beginning of the two monitoring projects, the regional fishery managers have charged the FPC with specific tasks regarding the implementation of the two monitoring projects as follows:

v  The CSS and SMP must be coordinated and complement each other. Mark groups for CSS and SMP must be coordinated to maximize efficiency and reduce costs. Mark groups for the two monitoring projects must be coordinated with other marking efforts through the region.

v  All CSS and SMP data must be available to the region through the FPC web site.

v  All CSS and SMP analyses must be available through the FPC web site.

v  The two monitoring projects should be managed to provide continuity and consistent time series data sets to support analyses and passage management decisions over a long time series.

v  The two monitoring projects must be coordinated with the project operators, the Corps of Engineers and the Public Utility Districts.

v  The FPC is responsible for coordinating all state and federal handling permits necessary for the implementation of the CSS and SMP. 

v  The development of budgets and work statements for the monitoring projects according to determinations of the state, federal and tribal fishery agencies.

v  The FPC Annual Report will report the results and analyses of the SMP for that year along with river operations, project research activities, fish migration characteristics, hatchery releases and adult passage.

The FPC is charged with the coordinated implementation of the two monitoring projects, jointly overseen by the regional fishery managers.

 The following tables from the CSS Annual Report for 2010 specifically identify mark groups and coordiantion with other groups.

The following tables, taken from the draft CSS Annual Report for 2010, illustrate the mark group coordination implemented by the FPC. The FPC coordinates, Comparative Survival Study and Smolt Monitoring Program marking needs with other regional marking for research and monitoring. The FPC objective is to maximize efficiency and multiple applications of available mark groups. This provides a benefit across the region by maximizing the information generated from regional marking efforts.