Views/Actions
Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program
RSS Feed for updates to Project 1997-015-01 - Imnaha River Smolt Monitoring Follow this via RSS feed. Help setting up RSS feeds?

Project Summary

Project 1997-015-01 - Imnaha River Smolt Monitoring
Project Number:
1997-015-01
Title:
Imnaha River Smolt Monitoring
Summary:
Agreements were reached through U.S. v. Oregon to release 450,000 yearling fall chinook salmon on-station at Lyons Ferry Hatchery as well as and additional 450,000 (total) yearlings from three acclimation facilities above Lower Granite Dam. The USFWS Lower Snake River Compensation Plan (LSRCP) funded the first two years (1996 and 1997) of this project, through the BPA. Direct BPA funding began in 1998. Supplementation of LFH fall chinook yearlings monitoring and evaluation studies were initiated with the commencement of operations of the Pittsburg Landing acclimation facility on the Snake River in 1996. This project provides the FPC's SMP with tributary specific emigration data from the Imnaha River. It continues a collection of a time series of chinook salmon and steelhead smolt arrival and survival information to mainstem dams.

The FPC will be provided with an index of daily fish catch and condition from the Imnaha River, and smolt performance characteristics past the series of hydroelectric projects on the Snake and Columbia River. Indices of fish passage, migration strength (or peak migration) and migration timing are provided for Imnaha River smolts and smolts from the run at large at key monitoring sites and mainstem dams. PIT tagged smolts also provide measures of smolt travel time and in-river survival through key index reaches. This is accomplished by individual tag detections at mainstem sites on the lower Snake and Columbia rivers. Additionally, fish quality and descaling information are collected at the Imnaha River trap and provide indicators of the health of emigrating smolts. The data provided to the FPC is used for in-season operational decisions relative to flow and spill management, particularly during periods when spill is being provided to improve smolt passage.

Smolt monitoring and PIT tagging is conducted during the spring smolt emigration period. The project will PIT tag up to 4,600 steelhead smolts (natural and hatchery) to estimate the emigration timing, travel time, and estimated survival from the mouth of the Imnaha River to Snake River and Columbia River dams. The project will assist the LSRCP hatchery evaluation study with PIT tagging an additional 5,000 steelhead smolts (3,000 natural and 2,000 hatchery). The project will also assist LSRCP with PIT tagging as many as 14,400 spring emigrating natural chinook salmon smolts and 5,600 fall emigrating pre-smolts may be PIT tagged for the LSRCP program.
Proposer:
None
Proponent Orgs:
Nez Perce Tribe (Tribe)
Starting FY:
1997
Ending FY:
2018
Stage:
Implementation - Project Status Report
Area:
Province Subbasin %
Blue Mountain Imnaha 100.00%
Purpose:
Artificial Production
Emphasis:
RM and E
Focal Species:
Chinook - Snake River Fall ESU (threatened)
Chinook - Snake River Spring/Summer
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

Map of the Imnaha River study area.

Figure Name: Figure 1

Document ID: P115887

Document: Emigration of Natural and Hatchery Nacó’x and Héeyey Smolts from the Imnaha River, Oregon from 3 October 2007 to 21 June 2008

Page Number: 16

Project: 1997-015-01

Contract: 39649

Map of the Columbia River Basin. Dams underlined indicate monitoring points for the Imnaha Smolt Monitoring Program.

Figure Name: Figure 2

Document ID: P115887

Document: Emigration of Natural and Hatchery Nacó’x and Héeyey Smolts from the Imnaha River, Oregon from 3 October 2007 to 21 June 2008

Page Number: 16

Project: 1997-015-01

Contract: 39649

The Imnaha River juvenile migration trap site with a rotary screw trap operating.

Figure Name: Figure 3

Document ID: P115887

Document: Emigration of Natural and Hatchery Nacó’x and Héeyey Smolts from the Imnaha River, Oregon from 3 October 2007 to 21 June 2008

Page Number: 17

Project: 1997-015-01

Contract: 39649


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) $425,417 $425,417 $425,379 $425,379 $429,602

BiOp FCRPS 2008 (non-Accord) $425,417 $425,379 $425,379 $429,602
FY2017 (Current) $425,417 $425,417 $425,387 $425,387 $318,997

BiOp FCRPS 2008 (non-Accord) $425,417 $425,387 $425,387 $318,997
FY2018 (Next) $425,417 $425,417 $0 $0 $0

BiOp FCRPS 2008 (non-Accord) $425,417 $0 $0 $0
Capital SOY Budget Working Budget Contracted Amount Modified Contract Amount Expenditures *
FY2016 (Previous) $0 $0 $0 $0

FY2017 (Current) $0 $0 $0 $0

FY2018 (Next) $0 $0 $0 $0

* Expenditures data includes accruals and are based on data through 30-Jun-2017

Decided Budget Transfers  (FY2016 - FY2018)

Acct FY Acct Type Amount Fund Budget Decision Date
FY2016 Expense $402,476 From: BiOp FCRPS 2008 (non-Accord) FY16 Initial Planning Budgets - Expense 05/22/2015
FY2016 Expense $22,941 From: BiOp FCRPS 2008 (non-Accord) NPT ISS 05/28/2015
FY2017 Expense $425,417 From: BiOp FCRPS 2008 (non-Accord) FY17 SOY Budgets 06/02/2016
FY2018 Expense $425,417 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 42 %
FY2011 42 %
FY2010 0 %
FY2009 46 %
FY2008 46 %
FY2007 45 %
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-003643 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - Imnaha R Smolt Monitoring NPT Active $8,356 10/1/2007 - 9/30/2008
BPA-004307 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - Imnaha R Smolt Monitoring NPT Active $8,302 10/1/2008 - 9/30/2009
BPA-004985 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - Imnaha River Smolt Monitoring Active $8,058 10/1/2009 - 9/30/2010
BPA-005522 Bonneville Power Administration Pit Tags - Imnaha R Smolt Monitoring Active $8,912 10/1/2006 - 9/30/2007
BPA-005651 Bonneville Power Administration PIT tags - Imnaha River Smolt Monitoring FY2011 Active $7,917 10/1/2010 - 9/30/2011
55729 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 1997-015-01 EXP IMNAHA RIVER SMOLT MONITORING - NPT History $326,839 1/1/2012 - 12/31/2012
BPA-006946 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - Imnaha River Smolt Monitoring Active $7,006 10/1/2012 - 9/30/2013
BPA-007668 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - Imnaha River Smolt Monitoring Active $8,536 10/1/2013 - 9/30/2014
BPA-008392 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - Imnaha River Smolt Monitoring Active $8,516 10/1/2014 - 9/30/2015
BPA-008915 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - Imnaha River Smolt Monitoring Active $8,712 10/1/2015 - 9/30/2016
74666 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 1997-015-01 EXP IMNAHA RIVER SMOLT MONITORING Issued $416,631 1/1/2017 - 12/31/2017
BPA-009530 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - Imnaha River Smolt Monitoring Active $8,756 10/1/2016 - 9/30/2017



Annual Progress Reports
Expected (since FY2004):23
Completed:6
On time:6
Status Reports
Completed:48
On time:36
Avg Days Early:4

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
4004 26123, 30588, 36693, 39649, 45508, 51121, 55729, 60624, 63588, 67554, 71576, 74666 1997-015-01 IMNAHA RIVER SMOLT MONITORING Nez Perce Tribe 03/2001 03/2001 Issued 47 170 27 0 16 213 92.49% 0
BPA-005522 Pit Tags - Imnaha R Smolt Monitoring Bonneville Power Administration 10/2006 10/2006 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-003643 PIT Tags - Imnaha R Smolt Monitoring NPT Bonneville Power Administration 10/2007 10/2007 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-004307 PIT Tags - Imnaha R Smolt Monitoring NPT Bonneville Power Administration 10/2008 10/2008 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-004985 PIT Tags - Imnaha River Smolt Monitoring Bonneville Power Administration 10/2009 10/2009 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-005651 PIT tags - Imnaha River Smolt Monitoring FY2011 Bonneville Power Administration 10/2010 10/2010 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-006946 PIT Tags - Imnaha River Smolt Monitoring Bonneville Power Administration 10/2012 10/2012 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-007668 PIT Tags - Imnaha River Smolt Monitoring Bonneville Power Administration 10/2013 10/2013 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-008392 PIT Tags - Imnaha River Smolt Monitoring Bonneville Power Administration 10/2014 10/2014 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-008915 PIT Tags - Imnaha River Smolt Monitoring Bonneville Power Administration 10/2015 10/2015 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-009530 PIT Tags - Imnaha River Smolt Monitoring Bonneville Power Administration 10/2016 10/2016 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Project Totals 47 170 27 0 16 213 92.49% 0


Review: RME / AP Category Review

2008 FCRPS BiOp Workgroup Assessment

Assessment Number: 1997-015-01-BIOP-20101105
Project Number: 1997-015-01
Review: RME / AP Category Review
Proposal Number: RMECAT-1997-015-01
Completed Date: None
2008 FCRPS BiOp Workgroup Rating: Response Requested
Comments: BiOp Workgroup Comments: For compliance with RPA 50.7: This RPA action is for hatchery fish marking only. Confirm that the scope of work proposed is for 100% marking of fish (visible or non visible) from the hatchery supported. If this project is marking fish for the hatchery, please specify the hatchery name and populations affected. If marking is conducted under another project or program, please let us know the name of that project/program.

BPA would like to discuss further coordination in data management needs of this project to support RPA 72.

For compliance with RPA 50.3 or RPAs 52.1, 52.2: This project needs to conduct assessments on hydro operations which is not clearly articulated. These RPA's had no identified gaps, please justify your support if you feel this project is essential to the success of the RPA. Note: Tagged fish may not be enough to support the RPA.

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: ( 50.6 50.7 62.4 62.5 64.2 )
All Questionable RPA Associations ( 50.7 0 72.2) and
All Deleted RPA Associations (50.1 50.3 52.1 52.2 56.1 56.3 62.1 71.3 )
Proponent Response:

Independent Scientific Review Panel Assessment

Assessment Number: 1997-015-01-ISRP-20101015
Project: 1997-015-01 - Imnaha River Smolt Monitoring
Review: RME / AP Category Review
Proposal Number: RMECAT-1997-015-01
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: Analyses using data collected under this proposal – whether conducted by the NPT, FPC, or others – should be increased and documented in future project progress reports and proposals.

Summary: The project provides valuable data for several other projects and management applications in the basin. The project rationale is clearly presented, adequately showing how the data collected and supplied by this project are applied to management issues and decisions. The history of project activities and the time series assembled are outlined in a general sense, at least insofar as what was done (rather than what was discovered).

In a previous ISRP review of this project, the ISRP wrote that 199701501 is not a research investigation but essentially a data collection project. That assessment remains accurate. The objectives are more accurately called sampling and data summary tasks designed to provide the data in a form suitable for a database. The objectives are adequate as far as they go, i.e., as strictly a monitoring project. The project itself is well conducted using appropriate sampling and population estimation methods. The methodologies for this sort of smolt trapping work are identified and referenced, and are adequately standardized.

Although the historical data generated in this project are presented in the proposal, the proponents indicate that interpretation of the data is probably someone else’s primary responsibility, or is at least outside of the scope of the proposal. It is unclear, however, whose responsibility is it to analyze this valuable data.

There remain several opportunities for making more effective use of this 13-year data set. First, in a general sense, it would be helpful for the proponents to discuss the meaning of their results. The tables present the collected data very well. There appear to be some trends, and it would be helpful for the proponents to discuss those possible trends. Besides showing the accumulated data, presenting basic analyses (with narrative) of those data would be required to fulfill the criterion that the project “benefit fish and wildlife” as would interpreting the data and drawing conclusions about effects on the focal fish population and management implications. These data do not need to be dealt with in a routine manner. The results need not just be reported but can also be evaluated and interpreted.

For example, how might accuracy, precision, and bias be evaluated? Would short-term operation of a second trap (if cost-effective), or another approach, provide accuracy and precision estimates? It is not clear what biases may exist in this sampling regime. None of these issues are indicated as being addressed.

As for interpretation of the data collected, there is no research component, no hypotheses are listed, no indications are given of any research analysis designs. There are meaningful hypotheses that can be tested. For example, Roper and Scarnecchia (1999: CJFAS 56:939-946) develop and test several hypotheses around a 3-4 year data nearly identical in form but of much shorter duration than the impressive data set described in this proposal. There are also many other papers cited in that paper where hypotheses are tested with screw trap data on salmonid migrations. Such hypotheses might include an analysis of factors affecting run timing and duration, such as discharges, water temperatures, lunar phase, etc. It might also compare survival rates of early and late migrants. Such hypotheses testing and analyses would provide meaningful information for the Imnaha and be potentially applicable to other areas of the basin. A thorough analysis of this data would not only make full use of this valuable data set, it would show the limitations of the data and improve the sampling design for the future. This appears to be a missed opportunity; there are no refereed publications listed as having emanated from this project by the proponents.

The data are thus not being fully utilized beyond the good use by the FPC and by the LSRCP. The next proposal or project report should preferably describe the analyses conducted or proposed with this data whether through the NPT, FPC, or others.
First Round ISRP Date: 10/18/2010
First Round ISRP Rating: Meets Scientific Review Criteria (Qualified)
First Round ISRP Comment:
Qualification: Analyses using data collected under this proposal – whether conducted by the NPT, FPC, or others – should be increased and documented in future project progress reports and proposals.

Summary: The project provides valuable data for several other projects and management applications in the basin. The project rationale is clearly presented, adequately showing how the data collected and supplied by this project are applied to management issues and decisions. The history of project activities and the time series assembled are outlined in a general sense, at least insofar as what was done (rather than what was discovered).

In a previous ISRP review of this project, the ISRP wrote that 199701501 is not a research investigation but essentially a data collection project. That assessment remains accurate. The objectives are more accurately called sampling and data summary tasks designed to provide the data in a form suitable for a database. The objectives are adequate as far as they go, i.e., as strictly a monitoring project. The project itself is well conducted using appropriate sampling and population estimation methods. The methodologies for this sort of smolt trapping work are identified and referenced, and are adequately standardized.

Although the historical data generated in this project are presented in the proposal, the proponents indicate that interpretation of the data is probably someone else’s primary responsibility, or is at least outside of the scope of the proposal. It is unclear, however, whose responsibility is it to analyze this valuable data.

There remain several opportunities for making more effective use of this 13-year data set. First, in a general sense, it would be helpful for the proponents to discuss the meaning of their results. The tables present the collected data very well. There appear to be some trends, and it would be helpful for the proponents to discuss those possible trends. Besides showing the accumulated data, presenting basic analyses (with narrative) of those data would be required to fulfill the criterion that the project “benefit fish and wildlife” as would interpreting the data and drawing conclusions about effects on the focal fish population and management implications. These data do not need to be dealt with in a routine manner. The results need not just be reported but can also be evaluated and interpreted.

For example, how might accuracy, precision, and bias be evaluated? Would short-term operation of a second trap (if cost-effective), or another approach, provide accuracy and precision estimates? It is not clear what biases may exist in this sampling regime. None of these issues are indicated as being addressed.

As for interpretation of the data collected, there is no research component, no hypotheses are listed, no indications are given of any research analysis designs. There are meaningful hypotheses that can be tested. For example, Roper and Scarnecchia (1999: CJFAS 56:939-946) develop and test several hypotheses around a 3-4 year data nearly identical in form but of much shorter duration than the impressive data set described in this proposal. There are also many other papers cited in that paper where hypotheses are tested with screw trap data on salmonid migrations. Such hypotheses might include an analysis of factors affecting run timing and duration, such as discharges, water temperatures, lunar phase, etc. It might also compare survival rates of early and late migrants. Such hypotheses testing and analyses would provide meaningful information for the Imnaha and be potentially applicable to other areas of the basin. A thorough analysis of this data would not only make full use of this valuable data set, it would show the limitations of the data and improve the sampling design for the future. This appears to be a missed opportunity; there are no refereed publications listed as having emanated from this project by the proponents.

The data are thus not being fully utilized beyond the good use by the FPC and by the LSRCP. The next proposal or project report should preferably describe the analyses conducted or proposed with this data whether through the NPT, FPC, or others.
Documentation Links:

Council Recommendation

Assessment Number: 1997-015-01-NPCC-20110124
Project: 1997-015-01 - Imnaha River Smolt Monitoring
Review: RME / AP Category Review
Proposal: RMECAT-1997-015-01
Proposal State: Pending BPA Response
Approved Date: 6/10/2011
Recommendation: Fund (Qualified)
Comments: Implement with condition through FY 2016: Sponsor to address ISRP qualifications in 2012 contract. Implementation subject to regional hatchery effects evaluation process described in programmatic recommendation #4.
Conditions:
Council Condition #1 Qualification: Analyses using data collected under this proposal – whether conducted by the NPT, FPC, or others – should be increased and documented in future project progress reports and proposals.
Council Condition #2 Programmatic Issue: RMECAT #4 Hatchery Effectiveness—subject to regional hatchery effects evaluation process
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review

Legal Assessment (In-Lieu)

Assessment Number: 1997-015-01-INLIEU-20090521
Project Number: 1997-015-01
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Completed Date: 10/6/2006
In Lieu Rating: No Problems Exist
Cost Share Rating: None
Comment: Estimate total juvenile emigrant abundance, smolt survival and smolt-to-adult return rates (SAR) of wild/natural chinook salmon and steelhead at Lower Granite and McNary Dams and support the Smolt Monitoring Program and NEOH M&E Projects.

Capital Assessment

Assessment Number: 1997-015-01-CAPITAL-20090618
Project Number: 1997-015-01
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Completed Date: 2/27/2007
Capital Rating: Does Not Qualify for Capital Funding
Capital Asset Category: None
Comment: None

Independent Scientific Review Panel Assessment

Assessment Number: 1997-015-01-ISRP-20060831
Project: 1997-015-01 - Imnaha River Smolt Monitoring
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:
Viewed in the context that this is essentially a data collection project, the rationale for the presentation of tasks as objectives is understandable. The proposal as constructed must be viewed not as a research investigation per se but a data supply project. The response does an adequate job of showing how the data collected by this project are applied through other analyses and inform management decisions. Interpretation of the data is acknowledged by the presenters as probably someone else's primary responsibility, or is at least outside of the scope of this proposal. However, the sponsors should remain vigilant on staying current on how the information is being used in management decisions to ensure that they are collecting the highest priority data. The proposal is fundable on that basis.
Documentation Links:

Council Recommendation

Assessment Number: 1997-015-01-NPCC-20090924
Project: 1997-015-01 - Imnaha River Smolt Monitoring
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Approved Date: 10/23/2006
Recommendation: Fund Pending Available Funds
Comments: Priority for funding if funding becomes available.

Project Relationships: None

Name Role Organization
Jay Hesse Supervisor Nez Perce Tribe
Briana Anderson (Inactive) Interested Party Fish Passage Center
Katey Grange Interested Party Bonneville Power Administration
James Harbeck Project Lead Nez Perce Tribe
Mary Hoxer (Inactive) Interested Party Bonneville Power Administration
Deborah Docherty Project Manager Bonneville Power Administration
Dorothy Welch Supervisor Bonneville Power Administration
Ashlee Rudolph Interested Party Bonneville Power Administration
Ellen Wilt Env. Compliance Lead Bonneville Power Administration