Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program
RSS Feed for updates to Project 1998-016-00 - Escapement and Productivity of Spring Chinook and Steelhead Follow this via RSS feed. Help setting up RSS feeds?

Project Summary

Project 1998-016-00 - Escapement and Productivity of Spring Chinook and Steelhead
Project Number:
1998-016-00
Title:
Escapement and Productivity of Spring Chinook and Steelhead
Summary:
The John Day River subbasin supports one of the last remaining intact wild populations of spring Chinook salmon and summer steelhead in the Columbia River Basin. These populations, however, remain depressed relative to historic levels. Numerous habitat protection and rehabilitation projects to improve salmonid freshwater production and survival have been implemented in the basin and are in need of effectiveness monitoring. While much of our monitoring efforts outlined here will not specifically measure the effectiveness of any particular project, they will provide much needed background (status and trend) information for developing context for project-specific effectiveness monitoring efforts. To meet the data needs as index stocks, to assess the long-term effectiveness of habitat projects, and to differentiate freshwater and ocean survival, sufficient annual estimates of spawner escapement, age structure, smolt abundance, SAR, and egg-to-smolt survival are needed. Columbia Basin managers have identified the John Day subbasin populations as index populations for assessing the effects of alternative future management actions on salmon stocks in the Columbia River Basin.

A coordinated approach to the monitoring and evaluation of status and trends in anadromous and resident salmonid populations and their habitats is needed to support restoration efforts in the Columbia Plateau. This project will focus on the Steelhead and juvenile Chinook component of this need. Currently, independent research projects and some monitoring activities are conducted by various state and federal agencies, tribes, and to some extent by watershed councils or landowners, but there is no overall framework for coordination of efforts or for interpretation and synthesis of results. This project extends the structure and methods employed by the Oregon Plan for Salmon and Watersheds Monitoring Program to the John Day subbasin of the Columbia Plateau. This approach, successfully implemented in Oregon's coastal watersheds, applies a rigorous, Tier-2 sampling design to answer key monitoring questions, provides integration of sampling efforts, and has greatly improved coordination among state, federal, and tribal governments, along with local watershed groups. This project is high priority based on the high level of emphasis the NWPPC Fish and Wildlife Program, Subbasin Summaries, NOAA Fisheries, and the Oregon Plan for Salmon and Watersheds have placed on monitoring and evaluation to provide the real-time data to guide restoration and adaptive management in the region.

The ISRP, in their guidance on monitoring, strongly recommended that the region move away from index surveys and embrace probabilistic sampling for most population and habitat monitoring. The objectives of these projects can only be met with Tier 2-level monitoring using probabilistic selection of survey sites with limited replication". The sampling approach outlined in this study fulfills these requirements.

By implementing the program we will address many of the goals for Tier 1 monitoring, such as defining areas currently used by adult steelhead for spawning habitats and summer rearing habitats for juvenile O. mykiss and spring chinook (adult/juvenile salmonid monitoring). The BiOp describes Tier 2 goals as defining population growth rates (adult monitoring), detecting changes in those growth rates or relative abundance in a reasonable time (adult/juvenile monitoring), estimating juvenile abundance and survival rates (juvenile/smolt monitoring), and identifying stage-specific survival (adult-to-smolt, smolt-to-adult) and environmental attributes (habitat monitoring). This project provides much needed Tier-2 monitoring for the two anadromous focal species in the John Day basin.

Integration with on-going monitoring is accomplished in the following manner. In annual reporting, we use data from on-going projects to develop a more complete picture of status and trends in resources and life stage-specific survival. To accomplish these tasks, we work with co-managers and other interested publics to establish a monitoring oversight committee for the region that is tasked with coordinating and integrating on-going efforts into a comprehensive reporting system of regional resources. This work is integrated with the current RM&E effort for the John Day River basin. Our efforts provide nearly all of the status and trend monitoring, and some of the effectiveness monitoring, for the RM&E projects. Coordination occurs through periodic meetings. This project provides information as directed under two measures of the Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program. This project was developed in direct response to the recommendations and needs of the Mid-Columbia Steelhead DPS recovery plan, the Independent Scientific Review Panel (ISRP), the Fish and Wildlife Program, and the Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Authority Multi-Year Implementation Plan.
Proposer:
None
Proponent Orgs:
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (Govt - State)
Starting FY:
1998
Ending FY:
2020
BPA PM:
Stage:
Implementation - Project Status Report
Area:
Province Subbasin %
Columbia Plateau John Day 100.00%
Purpose:
Habitat
Emphasis:
RM and E
Focal Species:
All Anadromous Fish
All Anadromous Salmonids
Bass, Smallmouth
Carp, Common
Catfish
Chinook - Mid-Columbia River Spring ESU
Chinook - Snake River Spring/Summer
Cutthroat Trout, Westslope
Freshwater Mussels
Lamprey, Pacific
Pikeminnow, Northern
Steelhead - Middle Columbia River DPS
Steelhead - Snake River DPS
Trout, Brook
Trout, Bull
Trout, Interior Redband
Trout, Rainbow
Whitefish, Mountain
Species Benefit:
Anadromous: 100.0%   Resident: 0.0%   Wildlife: 0.0%
Special:
None

Map of the John Day River basin including the Mainstem John Day River and all three major forks (North Fork, Middle Fork, and South Fork). Dashed grey lines represent subbasin boundaries, as well as summer steelhead population delineations (Lower Mainstem, Upper Mainstem, North Fork, Middle Fork, and South Fork).

Figure Name: Figure 1

Document ID: P124375

Document: Steelhead Escapement and Juvenile Production Monitoring in the John Day Basin

Page Number: 11

Project: 1998-016-00

Contract: 50129

Map of summer steelhead life history use in the John Day River basin and 2011 spawning and juvenile/habitat monitoring sample sites. Spawning sites were surveyed in the spring (March-July) of 2011 for steelhead redds and juvenile salmonid abundance and habitat sites were sampled in the summer (June-September) of 2011.

Figure Name: Figure 2

Document ID: P124375

Document: Steelhead Escapement and Juvenile Production Monitoring in the John Day Basin

Page Number: 14

Project: 1998-016-00

Contract: 50129

Map of sites selected for subsample spawning surveys and habitat/juvenile monitoring in the South Fork John Day River Subbasin in 2011 and steelhead life history use. Spawning and juvenile/habitat sites were surveyed in the spring (March-July) of 2011 for steelhead redds and juvenile salmonid abundance and habitat sites were sampled in the summer (June-September) of 2011.

Figure Name: Figure 3

Document ID: P124375

Document: Steelhead Escapement and Juvenile Production Monitoring in the John Day Basin

Page Number: 19

Project: 1998-016-00

Contract: 50129

Map of John Day River basin out-migrant monitoring sites.

Figure Name: Figure 1

Document ID: P126255

Document: Productivity of Spring Chinook Salmon and Summer Steelhead in the John Day River Basin

Page Number: 10

Project: 1998-016-00

Contract: 56008


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 *
FY2019 (Previous) $944,119 $944,119 $944,119 $993,481

BiOp FCRPS 2008 (non-Accord) $944,119 $944,119 $944,119 $993,481
FY2020 (Current) $944,119 $944,119 $1 $1 $0

BiOp FCRPS 2008 (non-Accord) $944,119 $1 $1 $0
FY2021 (Next) $0 $0 $0 $0

BiOp FCRPS 2008 (non-Accord) $0 $0 $0 $0

* Expenditures data includes accruals and are based on data through 30-Sep-2019

Decided Budget Transfers  (FY2019 - FY2021)

Acct FY Acct Type Amount Fund Budget Decision Date
FY2019 Expense $972,800 From: BiOp FCRPS 2008 (non-Accord) Nov 30th SOY Transfers 12/07/2018
FY2019 Expense $28,681 To: BiOp FCRPS 2008 (non-Accord) January 16th FY19 Transfers 01/16/2019
FY2020 Expense $944,119 From: BiOp FCRPS 2008 (non-Accord) FY20 SOY 06/05/2019

Pending Budget Decision?  No


Actual Project Cost Share

Current Fiscal Year — 2020
Cost Share Partner Total Proposed Contribution Total Confirmed Contribution
There are no project cost share contributions to show.
Previous Fiscal Years
Fiscal Year Total Contributions % of Budget
2013 (Draft)
2012 $11,814 1 %
2011 $36,200 3 %
2010
2009 $13,150 2 %
2008 $15,225 2 %
2007 $66,955 10 %

Contracts

The table below contains contracts with the following statuses: Active, Complete, History, Issued.
* "Total Contracted Amount" column includes contracted amount from both capital and expense components of the contract.
Expense Contracts:
Number Contractor Name Title Status Total Contracted Amount Dates
498 REL 1 SOW Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife 199801600 ESCAPE/PROD OF SPRING CHINOOK IN JOHN DAY BASIN History $145,291 7/1/2000 - 6/30/2001
5840 SOW Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife 1998-016-00 ESCAPEMENT/PRODUCTIVITY OF SPRING CHINOOK History $1,026,906 7/1/2001 - 11/30/2004
15113 SOW Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife 1998-016-00 IMPLEMENT EMAP IN THE JOHN DAY SUBBASIN History $864,137 9/1/2003 - 8/31/2006
20364 SOW Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife PI 199801600 ESCAPEMENT/PRODUCTIVITY OF SPRING CHINOOK History $421,087 12/1/2004 - 11/30/2005
25467 SOW Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife 1998-016-00 EXP ESCAPEMENT-PRODUCTIVITY JD SPRING CHINOOK History $491,533 12/1/2005 - 12/31/2006
28894 SOW Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife 1998-016-00 EXP IMPLEMENT EMAP IN JOHN DAY SUBBASIN History $378,911 9/1/2006 - 8/31/2007
BPA-004148 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - Escapement/Productivity Spring Active $15,500 10/1/2006 - 9/30/2007
BPA-003721 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - Escapement/Productivity Spring Active $15,803 10/1/2007 - 9/30/2008
BPA-004321 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - Escapement/Productivity Spring Active $15,342 10/1/2008 - 9/30/2009
BPA-004990 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - Escapement & Productivity of Spg Chinook Active $14,014 10/1/2009 - 9/30/2010
BPA-005478 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - Escapement & Productivity of Spirng Chinook Active $13,769 10/1/2010 - 9/30/2011
BPA-006384 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - Escapement & Productivity of Spring Chinook Active $15,206 10/1/2011 - 9/30/2012
BPA-006983 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - Escapement/Productivity Active $14,947 10/1/2012 - 9/30/2013
BPA-007624 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - Escapement & Productivity Spring Chinook Active $14,846 10/1/2013 - 9/30/2014
BPA-008394 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - Escapement & Productivity Spring Chinook Active $14,793 10/1/2014 - 9/30/2015
BPA-008917 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - Escapement & Productivity Spring Chinook FY16 Active $17,045 10/1/2015 - 9/30/2016
BPA-009494 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - Escapement & Productivity Spring Chinook Active $19,049 10/1/2016 - 9/30/2017
BPA-010022 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - Escapement & Productivity Spring Chinook Active $19,078 10/1/2017 - 9/30/2018
BPA-010625 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - Escapement & Productivity Spring Chinook Active $19,700 10/1/2018 - 9/30/2019
74313 REL 49 SOW Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife 1998-016-00 EXP ESCAPEMENT/PRODUCTIVITY SPR. CHINOOK/STEELHD Issued $924,419 2/1/2019 - 1/31/2020
CR-337501 SOW Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife 1998-016-00 EXP ESCAPEMENT/PRODUCTIVITY SPR. CHINOOK/STEELHD Pending $1 2/1/2020 - 1/31/2021



Annual Progress Reports
Expected (since FY2004):26
Completed:24
On time:24
Status Reports
Completed:106
On time:69
Avg Days Late:3

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
498 REL 1 5840, 20364, 25467, 32193, 36462, 40876, 46071, 51809, 56008, 60983, 64517, 68303, 71583, 74969, 74313 REL 21, 74313 REL 49 199801600 ESCAPE/PROD OF SPRING CHINOOK IN JOHN DAY BASIN Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife 07/2000 07/2000 Pending 60 126 14 0 9 149 93.96% 2
15113 28894, 34466, 39054, 44049, 50129, 54926, 59806, 63516, 66581 1998-016-00 IMPLEMENT EMAP IN THE JOHN DAY SUBBASIN Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife 09/2003 09/2003 Closed 46 90 0 0 3 93 96.77% 0
BPA-004148 PIT Tags - Escapement/Productivity Spring Bonneville Power Administration 10/2006 10/2006 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-003721 PIT Tags - Escapement/Productivity Spring Bonneville Power Administration 10/2007 10/2007 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-004321 PIT Tags - Escapement/Productivity Spring Bonneville Power Administration 10/2008 10/2008 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-004990 PIT Tags - Escapement & Productivity of Spg Chinook Bonneville Power Administration 10/2009 10/2009 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-005478 PIT Tags - Escapement & Productivity of Spirng Chinook Bonneville Power Administration 10/2010 10/2010 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-006384 PIT Tags - Escapement & Productivity of Spring Chinook Bonneville Power Administration 10/2011 10/2011 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-006983 PIT Tags - Escapement/Productivity Bonneville Power Administration 10/2012 10/2012 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-007624 PIT Tags - Escapement & Productivity Spring Chinook Bonneville Power Administration 10/2013 10/2013 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-008394 PIT Tags - Escapement & Productivity Spring Chinook Bonneville Power Administration 10/2014 10/2014 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-008917 PIT Tags - Escapement & Productivity Spring Chinook FY16 Bonneville Power Administration 10/2015 10/2015 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-009494 PIT Tags - Escapement & Productivity Spring Chinook Bonneville Power Administration 10/2016 10/2016 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-010022 PIT Tags - Escapement & Productivity Spring Chinook Bonneville Power Administration 10/2017 10/2017 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-010625 PIT Tags - Escapement & Productivity Spring Chinook Bonneville Power Administration 10/2018 10/2018 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Project Totals 106 216 14 0 12 242 95.04% 2


The table content is updated frequently and thus contains more recent information than what was in the original proposal reviewed by ISRP and Council.

Review: Fast Track ISRP Review 2010

Independent Scientific Review Panel Assessment

Assessment Number: 1998-016-00-ISRP-20100623
Project: 1998-016-00 - Escapement and Productivity of Spring Chinook and Steelhead
Review: Fast Track ISRP Review 2010
Completed Date: None
First Round ISRP Date: 2/24/2010
First Round ISRP Rating: Meets Scientific Review Criteria (Qualified)
First Round ISRP Comment:
This project has a good track record and is managed by qualified scientists. It will contribute useful information for managing adaptively within the John Day subbasin.

1. Technical Justification, Program Significance and Consistency, and Project Relationships
The technical justification and scientific background was reasonably thorough. There appear to be two major topic areas in this work. First, there is evidence that straying of hatchery Chinook salmon and steelhead into the John Day River system is adding to the difficulty of determining the status and trends of naturally produced fish in this (primarily) wild fish production subbasin, and there is the possibility that interbreeding of wild and hatchery fish may be contributing to a loss of fitness among naturally spawning and rearing stocks. This project proposes to extend the existing genetic monitoring program to further assess the significance of straying of Chinook and steelhead from hatcheries in other subbasins into the John Day River's natural production areas. Second, the project proposes to expand the aquatic and riparian habitat status and trend monitoring efforts. This is of interest because of the strong emphasis on habitat restoration in the John Day subbasin.

The project is consistent with a number of RPAs in the BiOp and with other programmatic emphasis areas in the region. The approach is clearly spelled out, and the ISRP appreciates that the project proponents have responded directly to our suggestions from previous reviews and incorporated them into this plan. The proposal references specific recommendations from the RPA workshop and identifies the RPAs in the BiOp that the work will address. Additional linkages are given to the John Day subbasin plan and to the Council's Fish & Wildlife Program.

The 2008 FCRPS BiOp identified the Upper John Day as a priority subbasin for recovery of the Mid-Columbia steelhead DPS. The John Day River is an important reference subbasin for comparisons to other anadromous stocks in more highly impacted subbasins of the Columbia River. Further, the John Day is unique among Columbia River subbasins because its Chinook and steelhead populations have had little influence from hatchery introductions. The project, initiated in 1998, is one of the more extensive monitoring and evaluation programs in the Columbia River Basin. The proposed work is consistent with the monitoring needs identified by the Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program, the BiOp, and the Oregon Plan for Salmon and Watersheds. The project also directly addresses several important needs specified in the John Day Subbasin Plan.

2. Project History and Results
The project’s history is thoroughly described, including tables summarizing results of the previous nine years of work in this project. The maps were very helpful, although most of the material referred to existing redd count, adult holding areas, and genetic sampling. It would also have been useful to have included maps or tables describing the locations of significant habitat restoration projects (perhaps by category, if available) and sites where there are records of juvenile salmonid presence-absence or abundance, because these are included in this project's objectives.

The project has generated much information on smolt production and adult escapement. The discussion of results could have been improved if the proponents would have discussed how the results to date have influenced management decisions. For example, what useful information was derived from the stock-recruitment relationship?

3. Objectives, Work Elements, and Methods
The objectives and work elements are generally complete and appropriate. Several questions did arise in reviewing this section:

1) Obj. 1 Are 4000 PIT tags enough to estimate SAR given the relatively few adults that will be produced from this number of smolts?
2) Obj. 1 Is a 100% detection of PIT tagged adults at the FCRPS PIT tag facilities a reasonable assumption?
3) Obj. 2 How does one obtain cost-free flight time for redd surveys?
4) Obj. 4 If habitat assessments are conducted only on channels 5th order and smaller, will some areas potentially used by Chinook for spawning or rearing be excluded?
5) Obj. 4 Ignoring fast-water habitat when snorkeling could lead to some error in estimating abundance if a substantial proportion of the populations using fat-water habitat. This is not likely to be a problem for Chinook but could be for steelhead. Could several fast-water habitats in each sample area be electro-fished to address this problem?

The two elements for which Fast-Track review were requested (Chinook portion of Obj. 2 and Obj. 6) were very complete.

Three of the five work objectives apply to ongoing efforts by the project's proponents, and two objectives (habitat status and trends, juvenile salmonid monitoring) have been called for by the ISRP but not yet funded. The objective of operating the rotary screw traps from October 1 to May 31 is admirable, but mechanical problems, weather-related issues, and other unforeseen problems will inevitably occur. It would be useful to state what back-up equipment and procedures are in place to deal with such events.

The spawner escapement estimation procedures were thoroughly described, and the project proponents have a lot of experience in this aspect of the work effort. It was nice to see that the proposed 2010 surveys will include some randomly selected reaches to check for Chinook salmon spawning range expansions. The ISRP wonders if any research has been done to determine the error rate for identifying hatchery fish based on adipose fin clipping in the John Day or nearby subbasins. What is the probability of mis-identifying a hatchery fish with an imperfect adipose clip, or a wild fish that has lost part of its adipose fin?

The location of the habitat survey sites will be determined by a GRTS (EMAP-type) randomized design. While there will be some inevitable compromises due to landowner access issues, we wonder if there is any value in intentionally locating some of the habitat survey sites at (1) the same locations as the spawning index sites or the juvenile survey reaches, or (2) within or near riparian or channel restoration projects. We agree that the GRTS approach is appropriate for assessing overall habitat status and trends within the subbasin, but additional and very useful information might be gained by co-locating the habitat survey sites with sites where fish will be censused either as spawners or juveniles.

Within the list of habitat attributes, we recommend expanding the surveys of large trees (>0.5 m DBH) to all species, not just conifers. Owing to past logging practices and wildfire history there are very few conifers of this size within 30 m of the stream channel throughout much of the John Day subbasin, but there are other species (in particular, black cottonwood) that meet this size criterion. While it is true that cottonwood will not persist as long in the streams, it is currently the best candidate for LWD recruitment.

To estimate escapement of Chinook and steelhead from redd counts, the proponents propose to use data on fish/redd from another subbasin. This approach seems reasonable given that weirs are not present in the John Day to enumerate the number of adults potentially spawning above the weirs. Why are there no weirs in John Day tributaries?

Steelhead redds will be enumerated in five tributaries thought to support independent populations. From this information subbasin escapement will be estimated. Why not estimate redd densities and escapement for each of the five tributaries (populations) rather than just for the subbasin as a whole? This approach could provide greater resolution and information about redd and escapement levels especially if the tributaries differ significantly in quality and quantity of spawning habitat.

For Objective 3, pertaining to habitat status and trend monitoring, are any of the sample sites likely to be in reaches where restoration activities have taken place? How will data analysis deal with information from both sites where habitat enhancement has been implemented and sites that have not been treated? Will there be an attempt to distinguish between the two in analyses? Water temperature and thermal refugia are not being monitored. Is availability of cool water during summer not a limiting factor in the John Day basin?

For Objective 4, will juvenile sampling be concurrent with habitat sampling? Estimation of juvenile abundance will be based upon snorkel counts of juveniles in pools. Pools will be ranked according to a visibility rating. Pools ranked 0 or 1 (poor visibility, high amount of hiding cover) will not be used in data analysis if the reach also contains pools ranked 2 and/or 3 (moderate to little hiding cover, good visibility). However, if all pools within a reach are ranked < 2, then the pools will be electrofished rather than snorkeled. This could introduce bias because for some reaches pools ranked 0 or 1 (probably the best fish habitat) will be excluded from analysis while in others (electrofished reaches) they will be included and, further, the reach data may not be comparable because two different methods of estimating fish density were employed (snorkel and electrofish). Density estimates of electrofished reaches may be greater than those of snorkeled reaches both because better quality habitat is being sampled and electrofishing may be a more effective way of counting fish. Why not electrofish all reaches and eliminate the potential problem?

4. M&E
The M&E program proposed by this project has been carefully planned and well conducted to this point. The proposed additions to the ongoing M&E effort (Chinook and steelhead escapement, habitat and juvenile monitoring, genetic characterizations) would round out the program and provide much needed additional information. As in the past, the ISRP supports both juvenile and habitat monitoring to identify productive rearing habitats, establish quantitative relationships between habitat quantity and quality and juvenile abundance and distribution, quantify limiting factors for juvenile survival, and guide habitat enhancement actions.
Documentation Links:
Review: RME / AP Category Review

Council Recommendation

Assessment Number: 1998-016-00-NPCC-20110628
Project: 1998-016-00 - Escapement and Productivity of Spring Chinook and Steelhead
Review: RME / AP Category Review
Proposal: RMECAT-1998-016-00
Proposal State: Pending BPA Response
Approved Date: 6/10/2011
Recommendation: Fund (Qualified)
Comments: See Programmatic Issue #2. Also see Fast Track April-May Council decision.
Conditions:
Council Condition #1 Programmatic Issue: RMECAT #2 Habitat effectiveness monitoring and evaluation—.
Council Condition #2 Fast Track April-May Council decision - Prior to contracting, sponsors to address ISRP Qualifications on procedures for site selection, analysis of habitat data and snorkeling counts.

2008 FCRPS BiOp Workgroup Assessment

Assessment Number: 1998-016-00-BIOP-20101105
Project Number: 1998-016-00
Review: RME / AP Category Review
Proposal Number: RMECAT-1998-016-00
Completed Date: None
2008 FCRPS BiOp Workgroup Rating: Response Requested
Comments: BiOp Workgroup Comments: BPA would like to discuss further the coordination and data management needs of this project to support RPA 72 and potentital coordination with PNAMP Data workgroup.

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 50.6 56.1 56.2 56.3 57.3 62.5 63.1 )
All Questionable RPA Associations (72.1) and
All Deleted RPA Associations ( )
Proponent Response:

We are in agreement and are willing to cooperate closely with the PNAMP data workgroup to make our data more avaialble. We are in the process of hiring a database position for our program to support database development for all of our BPA contracts.

Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review

Council Recommendation

Assessment Number: 1998-016-00-NPCC-20090924
Project: 1998-016-00 - Escapement and Productivity of Spring Chinook and Steelhead
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Approved Date: 10/23/2006
Recommendation: Fund
Comments: Budget reductions not specific. Project to be implemented with reduced scope. Sponsors should take the ISRP comments into account.

Independent Scientific Review Panel Assessment

Assessment Number: 1998-016-00-ISRP-20060831
Project: 1998-016-00 - Escapement and Productivity of Spring Chinook and Steelhead
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:
This is a large and well-designed data collection project promising important information on key species in the basin. Strong benefits to anadromous and resident fish over the long term should result from ongoing monitoring of population status and trends and of habitat restoration effectiveness. This project is to continue monitoring in the sub-basin, identified as a priority watershed in the 2000 BiOp, to quantify status and trends of fish populations. Index sites identified in the 1960s are still monitored and the project has expanded beyond index sites to include census surveys of all known spawning habitat. The proposal is to quantify status and trends of Chinook and steelhead populations and their habitats in the sub-basin. Benefits to non-focal species could result from ongoing monitoring of population status and trends and of habitat restoration effectiveness. The trapping and surveys have the potential to provide considerable information on other species if planned properly. It would be useful to make certain that they see and gain these side benefits from the extensive (and expensive) sampling involved.

Previous data from the project have been used by NOAA's Technical Recovery Team. The project cooperates with the Pacific Northwest Aquatic Monitoring Partnership (PNAMP), provides juvenile steelhead data to BOR research, data on bull trout to BPA project, smolt data to the Comparative Survival Studies, and habitat data to the Nature Conservancy. There is ongoing discussion of collaboration potential with other ODFW projects.

The proposers are well qualified and experienced for this work. The project's objectives are defined over monitoring areas (e.g. life-cycle metrics, spawner escapement, habitat) and tied to strategies of the SBP. Appropriate methods are described in detail for each objective and related to specific work elements with detailed deliverables and timelines. Appropriate literature is cited. The proposed probabilistic sampling and BACI experimental designs are linked to the Fish and Wildlife Program, ISRP recommendations, NOAA, BOR, and Streamnet database development, the 2000 BiOp RPAs for monitoring and the subbasin plan.

BACI is used to evaluate effectiveness of restoration activities. The proposal includes clear descriptions of sampling issues, history, and development of approaches. The proposal is weak on analysis procedures and how the data will be used to inform management activities (i.e., adaptive management). Strong collaborations in data provision and compliance monitoring mean that information is routinely transferred among collaborators. Information is also transferred through reports and provision of data to regional databases. Outreach publications and peer-reviewed journal articles may also be appropriate.

The budget seems high even for the fairly ambitious work planned.
Documentation Links:

Legal Assessment (In-Lieu)

Assessment Number: 1998-016-00-INLIEU-20090521
Project Number: 1998-016-00
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: RM&E for salmonids in John Day subbasin to support restoration efforts; fishery managers authorized/required; other actors may also be authorized/required; query whether cost-share is sufficient.

Capital Assessment

Assessment Number: 1998-016-00-CAPITAL-20090618
Project Number: 1998-016-00
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Completed Date: 2/27/2007
Capital Rating: Does Not Qualify for Capital Funding
Capital Asset Category: None
Comment: None

Project Relationships: None

Name Role Organization
James Ruzycki Project Lead Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife
Richard (ODFW) Carmichael (Inactive) Supervisor Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife
John Skidmore Supervisor Bonneville Power Administration
Eric Leitzinger Project Manager Bonneville Power Administration