Qualifications:

The ISRP recommends that the proponents describe their responses to the ISRP's qualifications, information requests, and additional questions contained in this review in their upcoming annual report covering FY 2019 accomplishments.

The 2010 ISRP review (2010-44b) contained the following statement, "In future years the methodology should be used to address specific hypotheses, with detailed descriptions of study plans, statistical methods, desired levels of precision, and necessary sample sizes." These concerns have not been addressed in this proposal.

1.      The proponents should identify a plan of action for incorporating suggestions from the 2010 ISRP review to use methodology to address specific hypotheses with detailed descriptions of study plans, statistical methods, desired levels of precision, and necessary sample sizes.

2.      The proponents should identify a plan of action to determine if samples are representative, and if not, identify the impact of using information from these samples for decision making.

3.      An explanation of the adaptive management process being used by the project to review and possibly modify its actions is also needed.

Comment:

The ISRP encourages the region to investigate the adequacy and likelihood for obtaining representative samples.

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

This project tracks samples of returning adult salmon as they move up the hydrosystem above Bonneville Dam. The project helps address critical uncertainties listed in the 2017 Research Plan by collecting data that allow estimation of upstream mortality as fish move through the hydrosystem and into tributaries. Estimation of migration rates between sites and dam passage times helps to monitor fish reactions due to changing river conditions. The data collected by the project also allow estimation of fallback at dams, stray rates, and the weekly portion of the steelhead run that is B-run. PIT tagged returning adults at Bonneville Dam allows comparison of these fish with data from fish tagged as juveniles.

Many projects use this information as the record of spawners returning to their native streams.

2. Results and Adaptive Management

The project reports seem a bit dated, but presumably the information is available in almost real time for use in the Basin by managers. More explanation is needed on this. An explanation of the adaptive management process being used by the project to review and possibly modify its actions is also needed.

Tracking adults PIT tagged at Bonneville Dam, when combined with use of GSI to identify origin of fish, allows determination of migration timing, stray rates, and upstream survival on a stock-specific basis. The proposal describes situations where the data from this project raised concerns about operations for detection of upstream migrants resulting in alterations in dam operations.

Approximately 48,000 fish have been tracked over the project's lifetime. Results have been summarized by year, species, and objective in annual reports from 2009 to 2018. The total number of fish tracked by year and the number by species are quite variable. An evaluation of the adequacy of the sample size is necessary to determine if the number of fish sampled per year and per species is appropriate. Without an evaluation, it is unknown if the number sampled is appropriate for the multiple objectives of the project. For example, the estimated minimum fallback rates for fall Chinook in 2016 are quite variable from dam to dam with Priest Rapids at 28% while some other dams had an estimated rate of 0%.

The proposal states that a "reasonably representative sample of the run" is obtained. Evidence of this assertion is required. Knowing the extent of bias in the sample is necessary if results are to be useful.

It is unclear if there are critical gaps in knowledge of upstream migration. For example, how is harvest information integrated into the findings? Also, are the impacts of technological change being anticipated? For example, if full parental genotypes can be tracked will the amount of data overwhelm this project? Responsibility for monitoring technological change should be identified.

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

Methods are appropriate. The proposal clearly identifies the connection between objectives and deliverables.

It is stated in the proposal that the ability to obtain a representative sample is affected by regulations on the operation of Bonneville Dam Adult Fish Facility. Efforts to determine the effects of having non-representative samples should begin immediately, so the impact of these restrictions on conclusions arising from this project's data can be evaluated.

The project has a good publication record with many project references and citations presented. However, while the proposal states the contract has a good record of delivering annual reports it also states that reports are delivered within 18 months of the end of sampling which seems to be an excessive delay. The proponents are encouraged to provide results before beginning work the following year to provide an immediate opportunity for adaptive management.

This project uses the extensive PIT-tag detection infrastructure now in place at mainstem dams and at many other locations in the Columbia River Basin to track adult salmon and steelhead through (and beyond) the hydropower system. This well-tested tagging technology is used in conjunction with a new technology (genetic typing) to determine the migration behavior (speed of migration, straying, fallback) and survival of adult salmon and steelhead belonging to specific stocks.

On balance, this is a well-justified project. The data obtained could help fill crucial data gaps and be useful in many applications. In addition, PIT tagging is less invasive and stressful than other methods, such as radio tagging, that have been used for tracking of adult salmonids. Information on the upstream movement of PIT-tagged fish can be provided to all interested parties on the PTAGIS web site.

The proposal could be strengthened in several aspects. It describes analytical methods and anticipated applications of the methodology only in general terms. In future years the methodology should be used to address specific hypotheses, with detailed description of study plans, statistical methods, desired levels of precision, and necessary sample sizes.

No information is provided on the specificity and reliability of the genetic typing methodology. How well and on what scale does it differentiate between different stocks within each species? What is the turn-around time for genetic typing; is it potentially possible that stock-specific migration information might be available on a near-real-time basis?

How will PIT-tag recoveries and GSI results be combined to estimate straying rates: what is the quantitative approach?

In the present proposal, Deliverable 1 (Determine stock specific run timing for Chinook and sockeye salmon and steelhead passing Bonneville Dam) and Deliverable 3 (Improvements to the Bonneville Dam Adult Fish Facility) are somewhat broadly but clearly explained. Deliverable 2 (Compare stock composition estimated by GSI with those estimated using PIT tags) should, however, be more fully elaborated: analytical methods have not been adequately explained.

Because the project was recently initiated (2009), few results are available at this time. Future proposals should summarize results to date and also, using experience gained by the first several years of data collection, outline anticipated future applications of the methodology and the expected benefits.

This project uses the extensive PIT-tag detection infrastructure now in place at mainstem dams and at many other locations in the Columbia River Basin to track adult salmon and steelhead through (and beyond) the hydropower system. This well-tested tagging technology is used in conjunction with a new technology (genetic typing) to determine the migration behavior (speed of migration, straying, fallback) and survival of adult salmon and steelhead belonging to specific stocks. On balance, this is a well-justified project. The data obtained could help fill crucial data gaps and be useful in many applications. In addition, PIT tagging is less invasive and stressful than other methods, such as radio tagging, that have been used for tracking of adult salmonids. Information on the upstream movement of PIT-tagged fish can be provided to all interested parties on the PTAGIS web site. The proposal could be strengthened in several aspects. It describes analytical methods and anticipated applications of the methodology only in general terms. In future years the methodology should be used to address specific hypotheses, with detailed description of study plans, statistical methods, desired levels of precision, and necessary sample sizes. No information is provided on the specificity and reliability of the genetic typing methodology. How well and on what scale does it differentiate between different stocks within each species? What is the turn-around time for genetic typing; is it potentially possible that stock-specific migration information might be available on a near-real-time basis? How will PIT-tag recoveries and GSI results be combined to estimate straying rates: what is the quantitative approach? In the present proposal, Deliverable 1 (Determine stock specific run timing for Chinook and sockeye salmon and steelhead passing Bonneville Dam) and Deliverable 3 (Improvements to the Bonneville Dam Adult Fish Facility) are somewhat broadly but clearly explained. Deliverable 2 (Compare stock composition estimated by GSI with those estimated using PIT tags) should, however, be more fully elaborated: analytical methods have not been adequately explained. Because the project was recently initiated (2009), few results are available at this time. Future proposals should summarize results to date and also, using experience gained by the first several years of data collection, outline anticipated future applications of the methodology and the expected benefits.