Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program
RSS Feed for updates to Project 1998-007-02 - Grande Ronde Supplementation Operations and Maintenance (O&M) and Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) on Lostine River Follow this via RSS feed. Help setting up RSS feeds?

Project Summary

Project 1998-007-02 - Grande Ronde Supplementation Operations and Maintenance (O&M) and Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) on Lostine River
Project Number:
1998-007-02
Title:
Grande Ronde Supplementation Operations and Maintenance (O&M) and Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) on Lostine River
Summary:
The Grande Ronde Supplementation-Lostine River Spring Chinook program is a cooperative project between the NPT, ODFW, CTUIR, and USFWS. This program was initiated in 1994 as a conservation measure in response to severely declining runs of Chinook salmon in the Grande Ronde Basin. The program utilizes supplementation with conventional and captive brood production to prevent extirpation and begin rebuilding of ESA listed spring Chinook. The program is administered under two separate contracts; Lostine River Operations and Maintenance (O&M), and Lostine River Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E). O&M encompasses all operations related to fish culture and maintenance of the facilities needed for obtaining broodstock and acclimating juvenile fish prior to release. M&E encompasses all operations related to gathering and analyzing information needed to evaluate if supplementation is beneficial to Lostine River Chinook salmon . O&M operations began in 1997 and operates under ESA Section 10 Permit number 1149. M&E operations began in 1998 and operates under ESA Section 10 permit #1134.

The Lostine River Chinook program relates to many of the Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program (FWP) objectives and measures (NPPC 1994). Measure 7.2D.1, encourages incorporating effective husbandry practices and Measure 7.2D.3 includes the investigation of hatchery rearing operations and release strategies to improve survival of propagated fish. In addition, this project furthers development of FWP Measure 7.4D (Captive Brood Stocks), 7.4F (Portable Facilities for Adult Salmon Collection and Holding, and for Juvenile Salmon Acclimation), and 7.4O (Small-Scale Production Projects). The monitoring and evaluation research outlined in this proposal is consistent with FWP Measure 7.1C (baseline data collection from naturally spawning populations), Measure 7.2A.6 which stresses the need for evaluating the genetic and ecological impacts of outplanting hatchery fish on wild populations, Measure 7.4L.1, which mandates evaluation of supplementation projects to increase production. Finally, Measure 7.4D.3 encourages the study of hatchery rearing and release strategies to improve survival and adaptation of cultured fish.

The strength of these mandates is intensified by the inclusion of the Lostine River spring Chinook population as listed under the Endangered Species Act on May 22, 1992. The facilities and activities associated with this program have been authorized under ESA Section 10 and Section 7 Permits and Biological Opinions. These documents include ESA Section 10 Permit No. 973, Permit No. 1011 (ODFW 1996), Modification of Permit No. 1011, Permit No. 1149 (BIA 1998) and Permit No. 1164, FWS Section 7 Biological Opinion 501.1100,1-4-98-F4 and ESA Permit No. TE-001598-3 (bull trout), and NMFS Section 10 Biological Opinion (1998).

The Grande Ronde River subbasin historically supported large runs of wild Chinook salmon. Adult returns to the Grande Ronde in the late 1950's were estimated at more than 10,000 fish per year. Escapement levels declined to what co-managers determined was an emergency situation. The Upper Grande Ronde River, Catherine Creek and the Lostine River were historically three of the most productive spawning and rearing areas in the Grande Ronde basin. In 1958, 893 spring Chinook redds were counted in the Lostine River. In contrast, 16 redds were counted in 1994 and 11 redds in 1995. In 1994, fisheries co-managers, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW), Nez Perce Tribe (NPT), and Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation (CTUIR) implemented a supplementation program utilizing indigenous stock in the Upper Grande Ronde, Catherine Creek, and Lostine River. This project was identified by tribal, state and federal managers as one of the 15 high priority projects warranting immediate implementation. The Lostine River O&M, in coordination with ODFW, is responsible for operating supplementation facilities on the Lostine River. The supplementation facilities currently consist of a temporary weir and acclimation facility. The production goal for the Lostine River O&M program is 250,000 acclimated smolts.

Beginning in 1997, the project has operated and maintained the adult weir facility located approximately 1 km upstream from the mouth of the Lostine River. A new permanent adult weir facility was constructed in 2010 and spans the entire width of the river to ensure the fullest collection of returning steelhead, and Chinook salmon for broodstock, M&E data, and management needs. The Lostine River acclimation facility was constructed in 1998 and is located approximately 21 km upstream from the mouth. Facility design capacity is approximately 250,000 fish at 20 fish/lb with a density index of 0.28. The facility consists of a water supply intake, supply pipeline, four raceways, drain/release pipes and in-line PIT tag interrogation equipment.
Proposer:
None
Proponent Orgs:
Nez Perce Tribe (Tribe)
Starting FY:
2004
Ending FY:
2024
BPA PM:
Stage:
Implementation - Project Status Report
Area:
Province Subbasin %
Blue Mountain Grande Ronde 100.00%
Purpose:
Artificial Production
Emphasis:
Supplementation
Focal Species:
Chinook - All Populations
Chinook - Snake River Fall ESU
Chinook - Snake River Spring/Summer
Chinook - Snake River Spring/Summer ESU
Lamprey, Pacific
Steelhead - Snake River DPS
Trout, Bull
Species Benefit:
Anadromous: 100.0%   Resident: 0.0%   Wildlife: 0.0%
Special:
None
BiOp Association:
FCRPS 2008 – view list of FCRPS 2008 BiOp Actions

RPA 50.6 Review/modify existing fish pop status monitoring projects,
RPA 50.6 Review/modify existing fish pop status monitoring projects,
RPA 50.6 Review/modify existing fish pop status monitoring projects,
RPA 50.6 Review/modify existing fish pop status monitoring projects,
RPA 50.6 Review/modify existing fish pop status monitoring projects,
RPA 50.6 Review/modify existing fish pop status monitoring projects,
RPA 50.6 Review/modify existing fish pop status monitoring projects,
RPA 50.6 Review/modify existing fish pop status monitoring projects,
RPA 50.6 Review/modify existing fish pop status monitoring projects,
RPA 50.6 Review/modify existing fish pop status monitoring projects,
RPA 50.6 Review/modify existing fish pop status monitoring projects,
RPA 63.1 Measure effect of safety-net & conservation hatchery programs,
RPA 63.1 Measure effect of safety-net & conservation hatchery programs,
RPA 63.1 Measure effect of safety-net & conservation hatchery programs,
RPA 63.1 Measure effect of safety-net & conservation hatchery programs,
RPA 63.1 Measure effect of safety-net & conservation hatchery programs,
RPA 63.1 Measure effect of safety-net & conservation hatchery programs,
RPA 63.1 Measure effect of safety-net & conservation hatchery programs,
RPA 63.1 Measure effect of safety-net & conservation hatchery programs,
RPA 63.1 Measure effect of safety-net & conservation hatchery programs,
RPA 63.1 Measure effect of safety-net & conservation hatchery programs,
RPA 63.1 Measure effect of safety-net & conservation hatchery programs,
RPA 64.2 Determine if artificial production contributes to recovery,
RPA 64.2 Determine if artificial production contributes to recovery,
RPA 64.2 Determine if artificial production contributes to recovery,
RPA 64.2 Determine if artificial production contributes to recovery,
RPA 64.2 Determine if artificial production contributes to recovery,
RPA 64.2 Determine if artificial production contributes to recovery,
RPA 64.2 Determine if artificial production contributes to recovery,
RPA 64.2 Determine if artificial production contributes to recovery,
RPA 64.2 Determine if artificial production contributes to recovery,
RPA 64.2 Determine if artificial production contributes to recovery,
RPA 64.2 Determine if artificial production contributes to recovery,
RPA 64.1 Estimate relative reproductive success (RSS) of hatchery,
RPA 64.1 Estimate relative reproductive success (RSS) of hatchery,
RPA 64.1 Estimate relative reproductive success (RSS) of hatchery,
RPA 64.1 Estimate relative reproductive success (RSS) of hatchery

Description: Page: 10 Figure 1: Map of Lostine River drainage in Northeast Oregon and location of acclimation and release facility and adult weir and trapping facility.

Project(s): 1998-007-02

Document: P123130

Dimensions: 984 x 1145

Description: Page: 11 Figure 2: Lostine River Acclimation Facility.

Project(s): 1998-007-02

Document: P123130

Dimensions: 800 x 427

Description: Page: 12 Figure 3: Transfer of spring Chinook salmon smolts to Lostine River Acclimation facility.

Project(s): 1998-007-02

Document: P123130

Dimensions: 702 x 640

Description: Page: 16 Figure 4: Newly constructed Lostine River weir during testing at average winter flows.

Project(s): 1998-007-02

Document: P123130

Dimensions: 885 x 665

Description: Page: 17 Figure 5: View of the newly constructed adult handling area at the Lostine River hydraulic weir.

Project(s): 1998-007-02

Document: P123130

Dimensions: 855 x 349

Description: Page: 25 Figure 7: View looking upstream into the Lostine River adult trap.

Project(s): 1998-007-02

Document: P123130

Dimensions: 843 x 636

Description: Page: 25 Figure 8: New facility testing during winter flow conditions at Lostine River adult weir.

Project(s): 1998-007-02

Document: P123130

Dimensions: 852 x 641

Description: Page: 26 Figure 9: Lostine River adult female being spawned at Lookingglass Hatchery.

Project(s): 1998-007-02

Document: P123130

Dimensions: 798 x 480


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

Decided Budget Transfers  (FY2023 - FY2025)

Acct FY Acct Type Amount Fund Budget Decision Date
FY2023 Expense $1,026,435 From: BiOp FCRPS 2008 (non-Accord) FY23 SOY Budget Upload 06/01/2022
FY2024 Expense $1,071,598 From: BiOp FCRPS 2008 (non-Accord) FY24 SOY Budget Upload 06/01/2023

Pending Budget Decision?  No


Actual Project Cost Share

Current Fiscal Year — 2024   DRAFT
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
2023 $12,635 1%
2022 $19,028 2%
2021 $30,310 3%
2020 $14,508 1%
2019 $7,402 1%
2018 $13,085 1%
2017 $36,754 4%
2016 $12,175 1%
2015 $4,400 1%
2014 $4,440 1%
2013 $0 0%
2012
2011
2010
2009 $0 0%
2008 $5,520 1%
2007 $5,520 1%

Contracts

The table below contains contracts with the following statuses: Active, Closed, Complete, History, Issued.
* "Total Contracted Amount" column includes contracted amount from both capital and expense components of the contract.
Capital Contracts:
Number Contractor Name Title Status Total Contracted Amount Dates
422 REL 17 SOW MWH Global, Inc. 1998-007-01 GRANDE RONDE ENDEMIC SPRING CHINOOK ACCLIMATION SITE History $0 6/15/2002 - 12/31/2002
Expense Contracts:
Number Contractor Name Title Status Total Contracted Amount Dates
4219 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 1998-7-2 M & E, GRANDE RONDE SUPPLEMENTATION Closed $927,292 1/1/2000 - 12/31/2005
4277 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 1998-007-02 GRANDE RONDE SUPPLEMENTATION - O&M Closed $1,624,938 1/1/2000 - 12/31/2005
25641 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 1998 007 02 GRANDE RONDE SUPPLEMENTATION - LOSTINE O & M Closed $330,953 1/1/2006 - 12/31/2006
25587 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 1998-007-02 GRANDE RONDE SUPP'L - LOSTINE M & E Closed $227,955 1/1/2006 - 12/31/2006
BPA-005574 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags/Land/TBL - GR Supp O&M Active $17,265 10/1/2006 - 9/30/2007
30437 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 1998 007 02 GRANDE RONDE SUPP'L - LOSTINE M & E Closed $238,538 1/1/2007 - 12/31/2007
30616 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 1998 007 02 GRANDE RONDE SUPPLEMENTATION - LOSTINE O & M Closed $327,066 1/1/2007 - 12/31/2007
BPA-003720 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags/Land - GR Supp O&M Active $12,675 10/1/2007 - 9/30/2008
35994 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 199800702 EXP GRANDE RONDE SUPP'L O/M Closed $333,673 1/1/2008 - 12/31/2008
35952 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 199800702 EXP GRANDE RONDE SUPP'L M/E Closed $235,824 1/1/2008 - 12/31/2008
BPA-004149 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags/Land - GR Supp O&M Active $14,249 10/1/2008 - 9/30/2009
39434 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 199800702 EXP GRANDE RONDE SUPPLEMENTATION M&E Closed $237,861 1/1/2009 - 12/31/2009
39461 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 199800702 EXP GRANDE RONDE SUPPLEMENTATION O&M Closed $448,936 1/1/2009 - 12/31/2009
BPA-004989 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags/Land - GR Supp O&M Active $13,270 10/1/2009 - 9/30/2010
44924 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 199800702 EXP GRANDE RONDE SUPPLEMENTATION O&M Closed $334,974 1/1/2010 - 12/31/2010
44925 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 199800702 EXP GRANDE RONDE SUPPLEMENTATION M&E Closed $243,176 1/1/2010 - 12/31/2010
BPA-005718 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags/Land - GR Supp O&M Active $20,318 10/1/2010 - 9/30/2011
50336 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 1998-007-02 EXP GRANDE RONDE SUPPLEMENTATION M&E Closed $386,847 1/1/2011 - 12/31/2011
50364 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 1998-007-02 EXP GRANDE RONDE SUPPLEMENTATION O&M Closed $380,409 1/1/2011 - 12/31/2011
55021 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 1998-007-02 EXP GRANDE RONDE SUPPLEMENTATION M&E Closed $405,851 1/1/2012 - 12/31/2012
55113 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 1998-007-02 EXP GRANDE RONDE SUPPLEMENTATION O&M Closed $353,129 1/1/2012 - 12/31/2012
BPA-007231 Bonneville Power Administration Land - GR Supp O&M Active $6,948 10/1/2012 - 9/30/2013
60107 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 1998-007-02 EXP GRANDE RONDE SUPPLEMENTATION M&E Closed $391,151 1/1/2013 - 12/31/2013
60108 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 1998-007-02 EXP GRANDE RONDE SUPPLEMENTATION O&M Closed $372,042 1/1/2013 - 12/31/2013
BPA-007492 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags/Land - GR Supp O&M Active $9,226 10/1/2013 - 9/30/2014
63319 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 1998-007-02 EXP GRANDE RONDE SUPPLEMENTATION M&E Closed $400,035 1/1/2014 - 12/31/2014
63320 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 1998-007-02 EXP GRANDE RONDE SUPPLEMENTATION O&M Closed $367,394 1/1/2014 - 12/31/2014
BPA-008234 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags/Land-GR Supp O&M Active $4,506 10/1/2014 - 9/30/2015
67520 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 1998-007-02 EXP GRANDE RONDE SUPPLEMENTATION O&M Closed $384,649 1/1/2015 - 12/31/2015
67626 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 1998-007-02 EXP GRANDE RONDE SUPPLEMENTATION M&E Closed $430,062 1/1/2015 - 12/31/2015
BPA-008946 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - GR Supp O&M Active $4,562 10/1/2015 - 9/30/2016
71214 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 1998-007-02 EXP GRANDE RONDE SUPPLEMENTATION M&E Closed $458,183 1/1/2016 - 12/31/2016
71215 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 1998-007-02 EXP GRANDE RONDE SUPPLEMENTATION O&M Closed $394,213 1/1/2016 - 12/31/2016
BPA-009583 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - GR Supp O&M Active $11,447 10/1/2016 - 9/30/2017
74668 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 1998-007-02 EXP GRANDE RONDE SUPPLEMENTATION M&E Closed $463,526 1/1/2017 - 12/31/2017
74548 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 1998-007-02 EXP GRANDE RONDE SUPPLEMENTATION O&M Closed $394,515 1/1/2017 - 12/31/2017
BPA-010030 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - GR Supp O&M Active $11,447 10/1/2017 - 9/30/2018
77169 SOW Susan Coleman LTAC-FF-1 Closed $65,000 10/1/2017 - 12/7/2029
74017 REL 8 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 1998-007-02 EXP GRANDE RONDE SUPPLEMENTATION/LOSTINE R.M&E Closed $471,769 1/1/2018 - 12/31/2018
74017 REL 11 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 1998-007-02 EXP GRANDE RONDE SUPPLEMENTATION O&M Closed $396,233 1/1/2018 - 12/31/2018
BPA-010836 Bonneville Power Administration FY19 Internal Costs (lease) Active $0 10/1/2018 - 9/30/2019
74017 REL 42 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 1998-007-02 EXP GRANDE RONDE SUPPLEMENTATION/LOSTINE M&E Closed $497,958 1/1/2019 - 12/31/2019
74017 REL 37 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 1998-007-02 EXP GRANDE RONDE SUPPLEMENTATION/LOSTINE O&M Closed $510,937 1/1/2019 - 12/31/2019
BPA-012138 Bonneville Power Administration FY20 Lease Active $9,037 10/1/2019 - 9/30/2020
74017 REL 54 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 1998-007-02 EXP GRANDE RONDE SUPPLEMENTATION O&M ON LOSTINE RIVER Closed $525,326 1/1/2020 - 12/31/2020
83821 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 1998-007-02 EXP GRANDE RONDE SUPPLEMENTATION M&E ON LOSTINE RIVER Closed $496,993 1/1/2020 - 12/31/2020
74017 REL 76 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 1998-007-02 EXP GRANDE RONDE SUPPLEMENTATION- LOSTINE O&M Closed $465,371 1/1/2021 - 12/31/2021
86723 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 1998-007-02 EXP GRANDE RONDE SUPPLEMENTATION- LOSTINE M&E Closed $494,892 1/1/2021 - 12/31/2021
BPA-012850 Bonneville Power Administration FY22 Lease Active $0 10/1/2021 - 9/30/2022
74017 REL 95 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 1998-007-02 EXP GRANDE RONDE SUPPLEMENTATION- LOSTINE O&M Closed $593,002 1/1/2022 - 3/31/2023
89446 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 1998-007-02 EXP GRANDE RONDE SUPPLEMENTATION- LOSTINE M&E Closed $497,165 1/1/2022 - 12/31/2022
BPA-013515 Bonneville Power Administration FY23 Land Acquisitions Active $5,000 10/1/2022 - 9/30/2023
84044 REL 6 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 1998-007-02 EXP LOSTINE SUPPLEMENTATION O&M Closed $523,477 1/1/2023 - 12/31/2023
84044 REL 5 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 1998-007-02 EXP LOSTINE SUPPLEMENTATION M&E Issued $497,958 1/1/2023 - 12/31/2023
BPA-013758 Bonneville Power Administration FY24 Land Acquisitions Active $5,000 10/1/2023 - 9/30/2024
84044 REL 37 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 1998-007-02 EXP LOSTINE SUPPLEMENTATION O&M Issued $546,510 1/1/2024 - 12/31/2024
84044 REL 30 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 1998-007-02 EXP LOSTINE SUPPLEMENTATION M&E Issued $519,868 1/1/2024 - 12/31/2024



Annual Progress Reports
Expected (since FY2004):64
Completed:36
On time:36
Status Reports
Completed:151
On time:119
Avg Days Early:3

                Count of Contract Deliverables
Earliest Contract Subsequent Contracts Title Contractor Earliest Start Latest End Latest Status Accepted Reports Complete Green Yellow Red Total % Green and Complete Canceled
4219 25587, 30437, 35952, 39434, 44925, 50336, 55021, 60107, 63319, 67626, 71214, 74668, 74017 REL 8, 74017 REL 42, 83821, 86723, 89446, 84044 REL 5, 84044 REL 30 1998-007-02 EXP LOSTINE SUPPLEMENTATION M&E Nez Perce Tribe 01/01/2000 12/31/2024 Issued 75 303 21 0 38 362 89.50% 3
4277 25641, 30616, 35994, 39461, 44924, 50364, 55113, 60108, 63320, 67520, 71215, 74548, 74017 REL 11, 74017 REL 37, 74017 REL 54, 74017 REL 76, 74017 REL 95, 84044 REL 6, 84044 REL 37 1998-007-02 EXP LOSTINE SUPPLEMENTATION O&M Nez Perce Tribe 01/01/2000 12/31/2024 Issued 76 255 12 0 14 281 95.02% 4
BPA-5574 PIT Tags/Land/TBL - GR Supp O&M Bonneville Power Administration 10/01/2006 09/30/2007 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-3720 PIT Tags/Land - GR Supp O&M Bonneville Power Administration 10/01/2007 09/30/2008 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-4149 PIT Tags/Land - GR Supp O&M Bonneville Power Administration 10/01/2008 09/30/2009 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-4989 PIT Tags/Land - GR Supp O&M Bonneville Power Administration 10/01/2009 09/30/2010 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-5718 PIT Tags/Land - GR Supp O&M Bonneville Power Administration 10/01/2010 09/30/2011 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-7231 Land - GR Supp O&M Bonneville Power Administration 10/01/2012 09/30/2013 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-7492 PIT Tags/Land - GR Supp O&M Bonneville Power Administration 10/01/2013 09/30/2014 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-8234 PIT Tags/Land-GR Supp O&M Bonneville Power Administration 10/01/2014 09/30/2015 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-8946 PIT Tags - GR Supp O&M Bonneville Power Administration 10/01/2015 09/30/2016 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-9583 PIT Tags - GR Supp O&M Bonneville Power Administration 10/01/2016 09/30/2017 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-10030 PIT Tags - GR Supp O&M Bonneville Power Administration 10/01/2017 09/30/2018 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-12138 FY20 Lease Bonneville Power Administration 10/01/2019 09/30/2020 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-12850 FY22 Lease Bonneville Power Administration 10/01/2021 09/30/2022 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-13515 FY23 Land Acquisitions Bonneville Power Administration 10/01/2022 09/30/2023 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-13758 FY24 Land Acquisitions Bonneville Power Administration 10/01/2023 09/30/2024 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Project Totals 151 558 33 0 52 643 91.91% 7


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: 2022 Anadromous Fish Habitat & Hatchery Review

Council Recommendation

Assessment Number: 1998-007-02-NPCC-20230310
Project: 1998-007-02 - Grande Ronde Supplementation Operations and Maintenance (O&M) and Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) on Lostine River
Review: 2022 Anadromous Fish Habitat & Hatchery Review
Approved Date: 4/15/2022
Recommendation: Implement with Conditions
Comments: Bonneville and Sponsor to address condition #1 (objectives) and #2 (adjustments) in project documentation. This project supports hatchery mitigation authorized under the Northwest Power Act (Council’s Fish and Wildlife Program) and the Water Resource Development Act (Lower Snake River Compensation) for the Grande Ronde Supplementation program. See Policy Issue I.b., II.a. and II.b.

[Background: See https://www.nwcouncil.org/2021-2022-anadromous-habitat-and-hatchery-review/]

Independent Scientific Review Panel Assessment

Assessment Number: 1998-007-02-ISRP-20230413
Project: 1998-007-02 - Grande Ronde Supplementation Operations and Maintenance (O&M) and Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) on Lostine River
Review: 2022 Anadromous Fish Habitat & Hatchery Review
Completed Date: 4/13/2023
Final Round ISRP Date: 2/10/2022
Final Round ISRP Rating: Meets Scientific Review Criteria (Qualified)
Final Round ISRP Comment:

This project provides important monitoring and evaluation data to partners in the Grande Ronde Basin Endemic Spring Chinook Supplementation Program (GRESCSP). Results from the project’s monitoring actions are designed to explicitly test numerous assumptions about the benefits and potential costs of using hatcheries as agents of salmonid conservation. Consequently, project findings are also of interest and value to other groups engaged in spring Chinook supplementation efforts throughout the Columbia Basin.

The proposal is well written and generally uses graphs and tables effectively to communicate prior results and plans for the next project period. Broadly, this is an important project that not only benefits spring Chinook salmon in the Grande Ronde basin but also produces information of interest to fishery managers throughout the Columbia River Basin.

The ISRP’s recommended Conditions are listed below. The proponents need to assist with development of an M&E Matrix during the response loop (September 24 to November 22, 2021) and to provide information to address the other following Conditions in future annual reports and work plans.

1. SMART objectives. Place expected time bounds on the implementation tasks (e.g., repetitive annual tasks, and one-time actions that may need several years to complete).

2. Project evaluation and adjustment. Describe the overall project adjustment process used by the project and specifically the process used to appraise its own actions to make any necessary changes to fieldwork protocols, data collection, analyses, etc.

3. M&E matrix - support. As habitat projects and monitoring projects are not presented as part of an integrated proposal or plan, the need for a crosswalk to identify the linkages between implementation and monitoring is extremely important for basins or geographic areas. The ISRP is requesting a response from the Grande Ronde Model Watershed Project (199202601) to summarize the linkages between implementation and monitoring projects in the Grande Ronde and Imnaha geographic area. During the response loop, we ask this project to assist them in creating the summary and provide information to them about what is being monitored by this project and where and when the monitoring occurs. A map or maps of locations of monitoring actions would be helpful in this regard.

Q1: Clearly defined objectives and outcomes

The proposal clearly defines the primary purpose of the project—to help operate and evaluate whether a spring/summer Chinook supplementation program occurring in the Lostine River is meeting its four overall goals. Under each of the project’s four goals, the proponents list one to four general objectives. Altogether, ten general objectives are described. To determine if progress is being made in meeting these objectives, the proponents developed 27 questions that their monitoring effort is addressing. Forty-one specific implementation objectives were developed to answer the management and monitoring questions presented in the proposal. The ISRP commends the proponents for developing monitoring questions that are largely applicable and useful to salmonid supplementation projects throughout the Columbia River Basin. Additionally, results from the project’s previous monitoring efforts were presented along with lessons learned. The data, figures, and discussion in the proposal unambiguously show the value of the O&M and M&E work being done.

The project’s implementation objectives, however, are not presented in a SMART objective format. Many appear to be reoccurring annual tasks, but others, such as the creation of a population model specific to Lostine Chinook, will likely take longer to complete and are not on an annual cycle. Consequently, the ISRP is uncertain about when tasks will occur and be completed. We ask that the proponents indicate when each of their implementation tasks will be completed and whether they occur annually.

Q2: Methods

The proposal provides adequate general descriptions of the methods being employed. Standard and well-established protocols are followed when collecting field data. New field data are entered electronically and downloaded into databases for further analysis. A table in the proposal links the project’s implementation objectives to the MonitoringResources.org website, where further details on the methods are described.

Q3: Provisions for M&E

Data and findings produced from the project are used by the GRESCSP in an adaptive management cycle. Cooperators in the GRESCSP (Nez Perce Tribe, Confederated Umatilla tribes, ODFW, and USFWS) develop Annual Operating Plans that are informed and modified by project data. The proposal presents examples of the how the Lostine spring Chinook project has changed its operations due to monitoring results in the proposal’s “Lesson Learned” segments.

Several questions regarding how adaptive management proceeds, however, need to be addressed. First, does the project have its own internal adaptive management process? Seemingly, such a process would allow the proponents to regularly review whether specific tasks were performed as expected and if any changes in objectives or methods are needed. Second, the proposal lacks a general description of the adaptive management process used by the GRESCSP, which should include a brief description of the process being used, how frequently it occurs, and how decisions are documented for long-term reference. The proponents mention that a supplementation workshop occurs every five years—is this when the GRESCSP evaluates progress and determines if any changes need to occur? If so, are those results summarized and reported somewhere?

Q4: Results – benefits to fish and wildlife

Quantitative findings produced by the project are clearly presented in the “Progress to Date” part of the proposal. For example, the project has met its goal of acclimating and annually releasing 250,000 spring Chinook smolts into Lostine River for 9 out the past 10 years. Additionally, adult returns from HOR smolts have consistently been greater than for NOR adults, indicating that the hatchery program is providing a demographic boost to the Lostine population. However, the most important contribution of the project may be the testing of key assumptions associated with supplementation. Data on HOR and NOR spring/summer Chinook are being used to examine a broad suite of assumptions about the benefits/costs associated with supplementation. These range from assessing and comparing HOR and NOR juvenile and adult survival rates, relative reproductive success, age-at-maturation, maturation timing, spawning ground distribution, productivity, genetic diversity, straying rates, and so on. Results are also being used to parameterize life cycle models.

Documentation Links:
Review: Fast Track ISRP Review 2010

Independent Scientific Review Panel Assessment

Assessment Number: 1998-007-02-ISRP-20100623
Project: 1998-007-02 - Grande Ronde Supplementation Operations and Maintenance (O&M) and Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) on Lostine River
Review: Fast Track ISRP Review 2010
Completed Date: 10/14/2013
Final Round ISRP Date: 4/15/2010
Final Round ISRP Rating: Meets Scientific Review Criteria (Qualified)
Final Round ISRP Comment:

General Comments
For the most part, the proponents have adequately addressed the ISRP's comments, providing comprehensive responses to some of them, most notably the discussion of “results.” The response was well organized and clearly presented. The proponents continue to take ISRP comments in a productive spirit to make their proposed work more transparent and subject to productive evaluation. We commend the proponents for also clearly identifying how and where the narrative was revised.

Comments on Responses to Specific ISRP Questions
1. “Clearly identify additions to this proposal from the basinwide RME strategy” - This ISRP comment was adequately addressed. The proponents identified and discussed two major additions to the project from the basinwide RME strategy. One of the additions, extended operation of the weir, is crucial for estimating hatchery and natural adult fish abundance and managing outplanting of hatchery fish above the weir. The other was an evaluation of details of the captive brood program.

2. “Provide in the proposal the goals and objectives for hatchery and natural production in the Lostine River that are components of the NEOH Master Plan. How do the objectives relate to AHA and the HSRG recommendations?” - Objectives for hatchery and natural production in the Lostine River that are components of the NEOH Master Plan are now more clearly identified (Table 1). The proponents evaluated HSRG recommendations based on AHA for the Wallowa/Lostine and concluded that NEOH goals for the Wallowa/Lostine, TRT abundance recommendations, and obligations of the LSRCP were inconsistent with the suggested goals of the HSRG. Thus, the proponents have not adopted those goals. They are, however, using AHA as a complementary tool to assess various management scenarios. This approach appears reasonable and the proponents are wisely keeping in mind the assumptions and limitations of AHA identified in RIST.

The proponents propose to "Manage population [presumably Wallowa/Lostine] for ... (PNI) of 0.67." and "Manage Lostine population for PNI of 0.5". These estimates need to be reconciled. Specifically, is the 0.67 level attainable if the PNI for Lostine only reaches 0.5?

3. “Present the results for each year of operation for each goal and objective related to natural and hatchery production, perhaps patterned after the NPT presentation at the supplementation workshop/symposium held in Orofino, ID. These results can be reported in a couple of pages with a table. We are not expecting and exhaustive report, but a manageable additions.” - Reporting of results was improved considerably over the original proposal. They were more detailed and included a betterdescription of life history performance results and assessments of how well the project has met its goals to date. Management assumptions (Table 5), which in effect are objectives, could be more closely associated with defined project objectives (Table 4). How do the two relate? Can management assumptions be considered sub-objectives?

4. “Provide a self-assessment of meeting the goals. In particular, the proponents should rigorously evaluate and present convincing evidence that natural production could consistently meet or exceed escapement goals and in what time frame.” - The proponents provided a reasonable self-assessment of how well established project goals have been met. Some short-term goals have been met and other midor longer-term goals either have not yet been met or data is insufficient to determine whether they have been met. The proponents still did not define time frames for short, mid-, and long-term goals. Nor did they present evidence or a reasonable discussion of whether natural production could consistently meet or exceed escapement goals and in what time frame. This is admittedly difficult to assess, but it appears from the data presented that at this point in time, due to variability in population parameters, the likelihood that long-term goals can be met is unknown. The proponents definitely should provide time estimates for short, mid- and long-term goals. Otherwise they have little meaning and could be interpreted (or misinterpreted) in multiple ways.

It is worth pointing out that the fish production that this project is evaluating is conducted under the Lower Snake River Compensation Plan (LSRCP) and negotiated in the US. v. Oregon production and harvest. The LSRCP anticipates a step-wise review of spring Chinook in December 2010, and steelhead and fall Chinook in 2011 and 2012, respectively. The sufficiency of the data collection and further evaluation of whether the overall effort is achieving the objectives of the subbasin plan and LSRCP will take place in that review. This project supports the NEOH monitoring design previously reviewed and supported by the ISRP. After the NEOH monitoring was designed the ISRP and ISAB further elaborated on monitoring supplementation projects, and the Ad Hoc Supplementation Workgroup has produced recommendations for standard monitoring of supplementation.

The proposal states that monitoring in the Lostine, using the NEOH design, is consistent withrecommendations for monitoring supplementation. However, in the data and monitoring designinformation presented in the proposal, there was an absence of discussion of whether abundance ofnatural-origin adults in the supplemented streams was contrasted to reference streams. The 2007 LSRCPannual report states that evaluation of spring Chinook supplementation in the Grande Ronde was unableto demonstrate a benefit to natural-origin adults. This is a critical evaluation that needs to take place inthe Lostine. Figure 16 shows a trend line for annual redd abundance in the Lostine in contrast to theMinam. This contrast appears to be total redds. The appropriate contrast needs to account for reddsproduced from hatchery and natural spawners.

5. “Clearly identify the BiOp VSP parameters that are to be determined by this project and how precision will be established for the methods to be employed to estimate the parameters.” - VSP parameters were identified. The proponents, however, did not adequately discuss how precision of the methods for evaluating VSP parameters will be established, but instead referred to other documents. Assuming this documents adequately address the precision issue a brief summary or synthesis would complement the response.

Qualification #1 - Measure abundance
The project evaluation needs to include an explicit measure of whether supplementation is leading to an increase in abundance of natural-origin female spawners.
First Round ISRP Date: 2/24/2010
First Round ISRP Rating: Meets Scientific Review Criteria - In Part
First Round ISRP Comment:

The project is important to efforts aimed at conserving/restoring spring Chinook salmon. It provides an opportunity to assess and evaluate how well artificial production succeeds/contributes to restoring a previously depressed local population. If successful, the population could be an important mid-basin component of the ESU. The project provides an M&E program that could be of both short term (prevent extirpation) and long-term (meet escapement goals for natural production) benefit to anadromous fishes in the Lostine basin.

The fast track portion to upgrade and operate the weir is justified. However, the remainder of the project needs a response in the form of a revised narrative. In the response the proponents should:

1. Clearly identify additions to this proposal from the basinwide RME strategy

2. Provide in the proposal the goals and objectives for hatchery and natural production in the Lostine River that are components of the NEOH Master Plan. How do the objectives relate to AHA and the HSRG recommendations?

3. Present the results for each year of operation for each goal and objective related to natural and hatchery production, perhaps patterned after the NPT presentation at the supplementation workshop/symposium held in Orofino, ID. These results can be reported in a couple of pages with a table. We are not expecting an exhaustive report, but a manageable addition.

4. Provide a self assessment of meeting the goals. In particular, the proponents should rigorously evaluate and present convincing evidence that natural production could consistently meet or exceed escapement goals and in what time frame.

5. Clearly identify the BiOp VSP parameters that are to be determined by this project and how precision will be established for the methods to be employed to estimate the parameters.

1. Technical Justification, Program Significance and Consistency, and Project Relationships

Lostine River spring Chinook have declined significantly in recent decades and now are a component of the Snake River spring/summer Chinook ESU listed as Threatened in 1992. This project is directed at preventing extirpation and increasing abundance of Chinook salmon in the Lostine through supplementation and is deemed by NOAA-Fisheries to be important for recovery of Snake River and Grande Ronde River Chinook salmon. The project also proposes to monitor status and trends of steelhead and bull trout populations in the Lostine basin. Apparently, little information on steelhead abundance and productivity is available for the Lostine River. Specifically, the program is to operate an adult trapping weir, support juvenile rearing at Lookingglass Hatchery and a smolt acclimation and volitional release program on the Lostine.

The Grande Ronde Supplementation project (including Lostine O&M and M&E components) is an ongoing project that has been reviewed previously by the ISRP. The projects have received favorable reviews by the ISRP largely because they effectively integrate scientific monitoring directly into program designs. Recent "Qualifications" of the Grand Ronde project stated in the previous ISRP review are of particular relevance for the review of this proposal. These qualifications include: 1) need for enhanced (adequate) presentation of analyzed data and results (especially for adult return rates), 2) the need for the M&E portion of the project (project # 200713200) to be funded to justify the O&M portion, and 3) enhanced decision criteria that complement program assumptions in order to fully consider various potential management alternatives.

The proponents point out that the Lostine project is a component of the Northeast Oregon Hatchery program, established through US v. Oregon and the Lower Snake River Compensation Plan. NEOH has undergone an ISRP Three-Step Review under the Fish and Wildlife Program. As well as a component of NEOH, the project is related to many other ongoing projects in the Snake Basin. Because so many of the projects are closely related, a better approach than reviewing projects individually might be to review the whole set of interrelated projects.

The technical justification for the project could be improved. The problem description should have summarized the abundance of natural and hatchery fish in the watershed before the program began as well as trends to the present. The background section should clearly identify the new elements in the proposal that put it in the fast track portfolio. The proposal identifies BiOp RPAs and other action agency documents that recommend implementation of an M&E program and expect the project, at a minimum, to reduce the risk of extirpation of the extant natural Chinook population. Although the proposal provides some data that documents the depressed status of Chinook salmon in the Lostine River basin, it should present more comprehensively the data and analyses that support this conclusion.

2. Project History and Results

The description of Project History is adequate. The project has been ongoing since 1994 and funded by BPA since 1998. To date, the project has been successful in achieving some of its objectives (Table 3 in proposal). The proponents state that NOAA-Fisheries concluded that the project prevented extirpation of the Lostine spring Chinook stock. It has met the short-term goal of maintaining escapement of combined hatchery and naturally spawning Chinook at above 250 fish. It has also enabled harvest by a tribal fishery. Its success at achieving the mid-term objective of maintaining an escapement of 500 naturally produced fish is less certain. This level of escapement appears to have been achieved, but only marginally, in five of eight of the most recent years (2001-2009). There is no clear trend of a sustained increase in escapement toward the long-term goal of 1716 naturally spawning adult Chinook, although positive trends toward the long-term escapement objective may require a longer time to manifest. It would be helpful if the proponents provided the time frame since inception of the project for achieving short-, mid-, and long-term goals.

Given the above uncertainty, is it likely that the project is only going to be able to prevent extirpation through continued supplementation or is recovery of an unsupplemented naturally spawning population a real possibility? A useful exercise might be to determine whether the population would remain viable if current escapement trends (marginally meeting or below the goal) continue. The proponents should also seriously consider terminating planting of hatchery adults above the weir to determine if natural production can be sustained without augmentation or, alternatively, provide justification for continued augmentation.

Presentation of results of the project should be improved. A primary "Qualification" of past ISRP reviews has been the evaluation of the program's success by robust data analysis and reporting of results (relative to biological objectives, work elements, and hypotheses). The current proposal gives a first level of these required/qualified analyses in that return rates, harvest rates, escapement, etc. are provided. However, the ISRP remains interested in deeper analyses that demonstrate how well the program is meeting its goals and expectations. Therefore, this remains a qualification. The project also should clearly state the objectives and goals as established in the NEOH Master Plan and the FY07 project proposal. It was sometimes difficult to distinguish NEOH M&E goals and objectives from the objectives of this proposal as, apparently, they overlap. Clarification of this distinction and relationship would be helpful.

Last January the ISRP attended a supplementation workshop/symposium held in Orofino, ID, sponsored by the NPT. In the symposium the presenters laid out the goals and objectives for fish culture (broodstock collection, spawning, egg hatch, etc) and post release goals. They then compared each of their projects to the program goals. The symposium included the Lostine project. The type of summary presented at that symposium needs to be included in the results section of this proposal. The ISRP also suggests looking at the presentation of results by the Warm Springs Tribe for Hood River steelhead and Chinook in their draft revised Master Plan. The presentation need not be ponderous, but it should be thorough.

3. Objectives, Work Elements, and Methods

The objectives, work elements, and methods have largely remained unchanged. This is appropriate at this point to avoid complicating the design until a thorough evaluation and robust analysis of the data are performed to warrant adapting the program.

The proposal would be strengthened considerably by a more comprehensive presentation of methods, particularly those related to collection of data on life history performances. More specifics are needed on how the proponents are going to achieve the data precision standards that are called for in the Comprehensive M&E strategy.

The proponents have made an effort to quantify out-of-basin effects on adult returns to the Lostine. They are currently developing a model that will incorporate ocean conditions. To help determine the impact of out-of-basin factors and assess efficacy of supplementation in the Lostine basin, the proponents should consider comparing patterns and trends in abundance of the Lostine stock to reference streams such as the John Day which has been little influenced by hatchery introductions compared to other Columbia Basin rivers.

An element of the objectives focuses on extended weir operation for steelhead. Although it is a minor element (opportunistic because the weir is already operated and maintained), it will provide tangible and logical support for the proponent's objective of monitoring adult steelhead returns.

4. M&E

The program has a strong M&E component built into the O&M part of the project. The objectives for this project tie directly into broader GRESCSP and NEOH program objectives, as well. The M&E components of the proposal are critical to evaluating the Lostine portion of the Grande Ronde Chinook Supplementation program. The details regarding assurance that the methods will achieve BiOp RPAs and basinwide M&E for VSP parameters could be improved. To date, the project has been successful in achieving some of its short- and mid-term objectives, which is encouraging. Nevertheless, continued monitoring is necessary, especially to assess adult returns of naturally spawning Chinook. The results of the supplementation effort in regard to natural Chinook production are mixed. In some years returns of natural spawners have marginally met the established escapement goal. In other years it has been well below the goal. Escapement is variable, as would be expected, but the concern is that even the best adult returns appear to have barely exceeded the escapement goal and no sustained increase in escapement is evident.

Modified by Dal Marsters on 10/14/2013 10:26:47 AM.
Documentation Links:
Review: RME / AP Category Review

Council Recommendation

Assessment Number: 1998-007-02-NPCC-20101220
Project: 1998-007-02 - Grande Ronde Supplementation Operations and Maintenance (O&M) and Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) on Lostine River
Review: RME / AP Category Review
Proposal: RMECAT-1998-007-02
Proposal State: Pending BPA Response
Approved Date: 6/10/2011
Recommendation: Fund (Qualified)
Comments: Implement per April-May 2010 Council decision documents for Fast Track projects through 2016 with condition: Implementation subject to Lower Snake Comp Review process and the 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
Council Condition #2 As per the April-May fast track decisions - The Council recommends this project for implementation. The qualification regarding measuring of natural-origin spawners needs to be addressed and confirmed in a regional approach to ensure adequacy of the current monitoring in the Grande Ronde subbasin

2008 FCRPS BiOp Workgroup Assessment

Assessment Number: 1998-007-02-BIOP-20101105
Project Number: 1998-007-02
Review: RME / AP Category Review
Proposal Number: RMECAT-1998-007-02
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: ( 62.5 63.1 64.1 64.2)
All Questionable RPA Associations ( ) and
All Deleted RPA Associations (50.6 50.7 )
Proponent Response:
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review

Council Recommendation

Assessment Number: 1998-007-02-NPCC-20090924
Project: 1998-007-02 - Grande Ronde Supplementation Operations and Maintenance (O&M) and Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) on Lostine River
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Approved Date: 10/23/2006
Recommendation: Fund
Comments: See discussion of Programmatc Issue: supplementation m&e. The NEOH Lostine component will not be complete by 2008. Thus, this budget would increase from proposed in 2008 because of lack of hatchery completion and this project accommodating both O&M and M&E.

Independent Scientific Review Panel Assessment

Assessment Number: 1998-007-02-ISRP-20060831
Project: 1998-007-02 - Grande Ronde Supplementation Operations and Maintenance (O&M) and Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) on Lostine River
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Completed Date: 8/31/2006
Final Round ISRP Date: None
Final Round ISRP Rating: Meets Scientific Review Criteria (Qualified)
Final Round ISRP Comment:
See ISRP comments on the set of NEOH projects under proposal 198805301.

This project conducts supplementation of Lostine River spring Chinook salmon toward avoiding extinction of this much-reduced stock and, in the longer term, achieving its recovery. It is one of several projects that compose the Grande Ronde Endemic Spring Chinook Supplementation Program (GRESCSP). This project operates a smolt acclimation facility and an adult trapping station on the Lostine River tributary of the Grand Ronde River. Adults are spawned at the station; the fertilized eggs are then transferred to hatcheries elsewhere for raising until the young are brought back to the Lostine smolt acclimation site. The project monitors and evaluates the results in terms of population abundance and life history performance. There will be side benefits to other species such as steelhead via monitoring at weirs.

The proposal makes a strong case for continuation and funding as part of the GRESCSP. The authors are to be complimented on a clear, well-organized presentation that is thorough in most details. The project's biological objects are truly stated as biological objectives. Much of this proposal could serve as an example for other projects' proposals.

Project history and summary results to date are well presented, but future proposals for this project need to show more results in terms of return rates. There is no evidence so far that benefit from supplementation is occurring. The proposal gives well-warranted recognition that long-term prospects for the population depend on the remediation of habitat problems by related projects in the watershed.

Biological objectives are described with well-articulated and designed hypotheses to permit robust adaptive management. It would be logical to add an objective of terminating the project when M&E determines either that it is not working or that the target population recovers. A response was needed describing such a decision tree.

The sponsors responded well to most of the few questions that the ISRP had relating to this strong proposal. They reiterated the nature of the hypotheses and biological metrics.

The Fundable (Qualified) recommendation is for two reasons:

(1) Scientific justification for the project depends on the funding of the M&E proposal 200713200.

(2) In its initial review, the ISRP requested a decision tree, which would describe a path of adaptive management. For each of the project's eight management objectives, the sponsors responded with a list of hypotheses or criteria, which they term "management assumptions." They regard the resultant outline a "decision framework" for guiding the decision process of NEOH adaptive management. The array is based on the NEOH M&E Conceptual Plan (Hesse and Harbeck 2000). In addition to this framework of assumptions, a decision tree would require statements of reasonably foreseeable alternative adjustments of management (scenarios, including project termination) that would depend on whether the assumptions are borne out. (See the decision tree provided under proposal 199800704.)
Documentation Links:

Legal Assessment (In-Lieu)

Assessment Number: 1998-007-02-INLIEU-20090521
Project Number: 1998-007-02
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Completed Date: 10/6/2006
In Lieu Rating: No Problems Exist
Cost Share Rating: None
Comment: Lostine River adult acclimation facility.

Capital Assessment

Assessment Number: 1998-007-02-CAPITAL-20090618
Project Number: 1998-007-02
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: None

Name Role Organization
Rick Zollman Project Lead Nez Perce Tribe
Rebecca Johnson Supervisor Nez Perce Tribe
Jay Hesse Supervisor Nez Perce Tribe
James Harbeck Technical Contact Nez Perce Tribe
Katey Grange Interested Party Bonneville Power Administration
William Young Technical Contact Nez Perce Tribe
Shane Vatland Technical Contact Nez Perce Tribe
Peter Lofy Supervisor Bonneville Power Administration
Jason Vogel Supervisor Nez Perce Tribe
Martin Allen Project SME Bonneville Power Administration
Eric McOmie Project Manager Bonneville Power Administration
Kristina Eilts (Inactive) Env. Compliance Lead Bonneville Power Administration
Sandra Islas Administrative Contact Nez Perce Tribe
Brian Simmons Project Lead Nez Perce Tribe