Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program
RSS Feed for updates to Project 2009-014-00 - Biomonitoring of Fish Habitat Enhancement Follow this via RSS feed. Help setting up RSS feeds?

Project Summary

Project 2009-014-00 - Biomonitoring of Fish Habitat Enhancement
Project Number:
2009-014-00
Title:
Biomonitoring of Fish Habitat Enhancement
Summary:
The Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation (CTUIR) utilizes traditional provisions or First Foods (see First Foods serving order in attached Umatilla River Vision paper) for providing the framework in natural resource management (Quaempts el al. in press). A major component of preserving First Foods is protecting and enhancing the habitats which sustain them. The CTUIR Department of Natural Resource Fisheries and Wildlife Programs are implementing habitat enhancement actions in the Umatilla, Walla Walla, Tucannon, Grande Ronde and John Day basins in NE Oregon and SE Washington.
This project entails development of a biomonitoring plan to determine the effects of aquatic habitat enhancement actions on target species populations. A physical habitat monitoring plan has been developed and now a monitoring plan is needed that includes an experimental design which will scientifically determine the biological response to various habitat treatments anticipated by CTUIR. The products of this effort will increase an ecological understanding of current and changing stream channel, floodplain, water quality, and aquatic habitat conditions and provide information to an interdisciplinary planning team. These products will be used to 1) help determine the biological benefits of aquatic habitat improvements; 2) establish relationships between physical habitat conditions and biological responses to improved habitat; and 3) inform manager’s decisions for modifying existing habitat work and implementing new watershed restoration plans for achieving desired future conditions.
The CTUIR anticipate that the results of this project (the biological monitoring plan) will be used in a multi-year effort to evaluate the biological response to 1) existing habitats and 2) physical habitat improvements in the Umatilla, Walla Walla, Tucannon, Grande Ronde, and John Day Rivers. Because we will implement this monitoring plan over several years, a selected subcontractor will collaborate and provide insightful guidance over a 3 to 4 year period. While many of the tasks (1,2, 3 and 5) associated with this request for proposals may be completed at the discretion of the respondent, the ongoing collaboration and guidance (Task 4) will require a continued relationship between the respondent and the CTUIR Fisheries Program. As a part of Task 4, the respondent is requested to work with: the Fisheries Program Manager, RM&E project leader and Habitat project leader, and possibly the Research Geographer.
Proposer:
Proponent Orgs:
Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR) (Tribe)
Starting FY:
2008
Ending FY:
2032
Stage:
Implementation - Project Status Report
Area:
Province Subbasin %
Blue Mountain Grande Ronde 20.00%
Columbia Plateau John Day 20.00%
Tucannon 20.00%
Umatilla 20.00%
Walla Walla 20.00%
Purpose:
Habitat
Emphasis:
RM and E
Focal Species:
Chinook - All Populations
Chinook - Mid-Columbia River Spring ESU
Chinook - Snake River Spring/Summer ESU
Lamprey, Pacific
Other Anadromous
Steelhead - Middle Columbia River DPS
Steelhead - Snake River DPS
Trout, Bull
Species Benefit:
Anadromous: 100.0%   Resident: 0.0%   Wildlife: 0.0%
Special:
None
BiOp Association:
None

No photos have been uploaded yet for this project.

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) $361,866 $357,926 $357,926 $314,084

Fish Accord - LRT - Umatilla $361,866 $357,926 $357,926 $314,084
FY2020 (Current) $361,866 $361,866 $353,986 $353,986 $0

Fish Accord - LRT - Umatilla $361,866 $353,986 $353,986 $0
FY2021 (Next) $366,389 $366,389 $0 $0 $0

Fish Accord - LRT - Umatilla $366,389 $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 $361,866 From: Fish Accord - LRT - Umatilla Accord Extensions (Umatilla Tribe) 10/1/2018 10/01/2018
FY2020 Expense $361,866 From: Fish Accord - LRT - Umatilla Accord Extensions (Umatilla Tribe) 10/1/2018 10/01/2018
FY2021 Expense $366,389 From: Fish Accord - LRT - Umatilla Accord Extensions (Umatilla Tribe) 10/1/2018 10/01/2018

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
2019 $50,000 (Draft) 12 % (Draft)
2018 $50,000 12 %
2017 $50,000 13 %
2016 $50,000 13 %
2015 $7,475 3 %
2014 $27,000 52 %
2013
2012
2011

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
BPA-008988 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - Fish Habitat Enhancement Active $3,788 10/1/2015 - 9/30/2016
BPA-010182 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - Fish Habitat Enhancement Active $3,816 10/1/2017 - 9/30/2018
BPA-010776 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - Fish Habitat Enhancement Active $3,940 10/1/2018 - 9/30/2019
73982 REL 67 SOW Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR) 2009-014-00 EXP ACCORD FISH HABITAT ENHANCEMENT BIO-MONITOR Issued $353,986 3/1/2019 - 2/29/2020
73982 REL 83 SOW Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR) 2009-014-00 EXP ACCORD FISH HABITAT ENHANCEMENT BIO-MONITOR Issued $353,986 3/1/2020 - 2/28/2021



Annual Progress Reports
Expected (since FY2004):13
Completed:9
On time:9
Status Reports
Completed:40
On time:26
Avg Days Late:2

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
42775 48253, 53138, 58704, 63593, 68461, 71934, 73982 REL 6, 73982 REL 30, 73982 REL 67, 73982 REL 83 2009-014-00 EXP BIOMONITORING OF FISH HABITAT ENHANCEMENT Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR) 06/2009 06/2009 Issued 39 60 13 0 10 83 87.95% 2
BPA-008988 PIT Tags - Fish Habitat Enhancement Bonneville Power Administration 10/2015 10/2015 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-010182 PIT Tags - Fish Habitat Enhancement Bonneville Power Administration 10/2017 10/2017 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-010776 PIT Tags - Fish Habitat Enhancement Bonneville Power Administration 10/2018 10/2018 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Project Totals 39 60 13 0 10 83 87.95% 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: RME / AP Category Review

Council Recommendation

Assessment Number: 2009-014-00-NPCC-20110121
Project: 2009-014-00 - Biomonitoring of Fish Habitat Enhancement
Review: RME / AP Category Review
Proposal: RMECAT-2009-014-00
Proposal State: Pending BPA Response
Approved Date: 6/10/2011
Recommendation: Fund (In Part)
Comments: See Programmatic issue #2. Implementation recommendation beyond FY 2012 depends on ISRP review of study design.
Conditions:
Council Condition #1 Programmatic Issue: RMECAT #2 Habitat effectiveness monitoring and evaluation—.
Council Condition #2 Qualification: Currently, the proposal does not provide enough information to allow a complete scientific evaluation. Overall, this proposal is to provide funding to work with a consulting firm (Stillwater Sciences) to develop an experimental design for evaluation of the effectiveness of habitat restoration activities in five subbasins. Given the importance of this work, the ISRP recommends that it review the proposed experimental design when it is completed.

Independent Scientific Review Panel Assessment

Assessment Number: 2009-014-00-ISRP-20101015
Project: 2009-014-00 - Biomonitoring of Fish Habitat Enhancement
Review: RME / AP Category Review
Proposal Number: RMECAT-2009-014-00
Completed Date: 12/17/2010
Final Round ISRP Date: 12/17/2010
Final Round ISRP Rating: Meets Scientific Review Criteria (Qualified)
Final Round ISRP Comment:
Qualification: Currently, the proposal does not provide enough information to allow a complete scientific evaluation. Overall, this proposal is to provide funding to work with a consulting firm (Stillwater Sciences) to develop an experimental design for evaluation of the effectiveness of habitat restoration activities in five subbasins. Given the importance of this work, the ISRP recommends that it review the proposed experimental design when it is completed.

The proponents of this work propose to develop and publish in the peer-reviewed literature a detailed design for evaluating habitat enhancement across five basins managed by the CTUIR. Evaluating the effectiveness of habitat enhancement, especially for anadromous steelhead and Chinook, but also migratory fish like bull trout, is very challenging because: a) effects of factors outside of the basins (like ocean conditions) interact with any effects of habitat enhancement, and b) fish use habitat across multiple scales, even in freshwater, so response variables must be measured across multiple scales as well.

Overlaid on this is a third challenge, which is that habitat enhancement is combined with flow augmentation and hatchery supplementation in various tributaries, making simple treatment-control comparisons difficult. In many cases, these three main actions are combined, so that simple comparisons are often confounded. For example, effects of habitat enhancement measured in a treatment vs. control stream could be caused by another factor that is also different between the two streams (e.g., one has received supplementation whereas the other has not).

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

The CTUIR is proposing to develop and publish an experimental design and sampling protocol to measure biological results of habitat enhancement actions in a scientifically defensible way. The project is well justified and badly needed in the Umatilla Basin. This project is related to regional intensively monitored watershed (IMW) programs and to MERR, PNAMP, CSMEP, and ISEMP (although it is unclear how it will be integrated with these other programs). It addresses the ISRP’s recommendation for habitat effectiveness monitoring in the Umatilla Basin.

Discussion of the technical background could have been improved if the proponents had presented the conceptual experimental design that they say was completed in 2009. The proponents also say they have summarized RM&E actions in each of the five subbasins on ceded land. It would have been useful, even necessary, to include the summary in the proposal in abbreviated form.

The technical challenge, as described above, will be to develop an experimental design which can:

a) Address the interaction between freshwater habitat (and changes to it by habitat enhancement) and mainstem survival, ocean conditions, and climate change.

b) Address how effects of habitat enhancement can be teased apart from effects of supplementation, flow augmentation, or other factors that affect freshwater survival and growth. It seems that statistical models could be developed across this larger number of basins and tributaries to partition out the effects of these factors, as well as the effects of different basins, and changes through time, perhaps using a “model selection” approach (Burnham and Anderson 2002. Springer).

c) Address what response variables about fish and habitat will be measured at what scale, to test specific hypotheses. For example, hypotheses may range from some at the local scale such as “Growth of juvenile Chinook will be greater in off channel than mainstem habitats” to very broad-scale hypotheses such as “Relative reproductive success of steelhead is greater in tributaries where habitat has been enhanced versus control watersheds without habitat enhancement, after accounting for the effects of density-dependence, ocean conditions, and changes in supplementation.”

2. History: Accomplishments, Results, and Adaptive Management

The proponents have completed a conceptual experimental design but did not include it in the proposal.

3. Project Relationships, Emerging Limiting Factors, and Tailored Questions for Type of Work (Hatchery, RME, Tagging)

The project appears to be closely related to other projects on ceded lands and to ODFW’s Umatilla Intensively Monitored Watershed program, but these linkages were not entirely clear.

Emerging limiting factors include overarching effects of climate change, lag times from other projects or disturbances, and effects of supplementation on biological responses. How the experimental design will tease apart these effects from those of habitat enhancement will need to be clearly laid out.

4. Deliverables, Work Elements, Metrics, and Methods

Metrics and methods will need to be made clear in the design. At a finer level than the interacting effects described above, rarely is a habitat response (e.g., side channel development) independent of other habitat changes (e.g., flood plain reconnection). Separating a single response from all other habitat responses, say in a reach, could be difficult. The design will also need to clearly lay out how this will be addressed.
First Round ISRP Date: 10/18/2010
First Round ISRP Rating: Meets Scientific Review Criteria (Qualified)
First Round ISRP Comment:
Qualification: Currently, the proposal does not provide enough information to allow a complete scientific evaluation. Overall, this proposal is to provide funding to work with a consulting firm (Stillwater Sciences) to develop an experimental design for evaluation of the effectiveness of habitat restoration activities in five subbasins. Given the importance of this work, the ISRP recommends that it review the proposed experimental design when it is completed.

The proponents of this work propose to develop and publish in the peer-reviewed literature a detailed design for evaluating habitat enhancement across five basins managed by the CTUIR. Evaluating the effectiveness of habitat enhancement, especially for anadromous steelhead and Chinook, but also migratory fish like bull trout, is very challenging because: a) effects of factors outside of the basins (like ocean conditions) interact with any effects of habitat enhancement, and b) fish use habitat across multiple scales, even in freshwater, so response variables must be measured across multiple scales as well.

Overlaid on this is a third challenge, which is that habitat enhancement is combined with flow augmentation and hatchery supplementation in various tributaries, making simple treatment-control comparisons difficult. In many cases, these three main actions are combined, so that simple comparisons are often confounded. For example, effects of habitat enhancement measured in a treatment vs. control stream could be caused by another factor that is also different between the two streams (e.g., one has received supplementation whereas the other has not).

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

The CTUIR is proposing to develop and publish an experimental design and sampling protocol to measure biological results of habitat enhancement actions in a scientifically defensible way. The project is well justified and badly needed in the Umatilla Basin. This project is related to regional intensively monitored watershed (IMW) programs and to MERR, PNAMP, CSMEP, and ISEMP (although it is unclear how it will be integrated with these other programs). It addresses the ISRP’s recommendation for habitat effectiveness monitoring in the Umatilla Basin.

Discussion of the technical background could have been improved if the proponents had presented the conceptual experimental design that they say was completed in 2009. The proponents also say they have summarized RM&E actions in each of the five subbasins on ceded land. It would have been useful, even necessary, to include the summary in the proposal in abbreviated form.

The technical challenge, as described above, will be to develop an experimental design which can:

a) Address the interaction between freshwater habitat (and changes to it by habitat enhancement) and mainstem survival, ocean conditions, and climate change.

b) Address how effects of habitat enhancement can be teased apart from effects of supplementation, flow augmentation, or other factors that affect freshwater survival and growth. It seems that statistical models could be developed across this larger number of basins and tributaries to partition out the effects of these factors, as well as the effects of different basins, and changes through time, perhaps using a “model selection” approach (Burnham and Anderson 2002. Springer).

c) Address what response variables about fish and habitat will be measured at what scale, to test specific hypotheses. For example, hypotheses may range from some at the local scale such as “Growth of juvenile Chinook will be greater in off channel than mainstem habitats” to very broad-scale hypotheses such as “Relative reproductive success of steelhead is greater in tributaries where habitat has been enhanced versus control watersheds without habitat enhancement, after accounting for the effects of density-dependence, ocean conditions, and changes in supplementation.”

2. History: Accomplishments, Results, and Adaptive Management

The proponents have completed a conceptual experimental design but did not include it in the proposal.

3. Project Relationships, Emerging Limiting Factors, and Tailored Questions for Type of Work (Hatchery, RME, Tagging)

The project appears to be closely related to other projects on ceded lands and to ODFW’s Umatilla Intensively Monitored Watershed program, but these linkages were not entirely clear.

Emerging limiting factors include overarching effects of climate change, lag times from other projects or disturbances, and effects of supplementation on biological responses. How the experimental design will tease apart these effects from those of habitat enhancement will need to be clearly laid out.

4. Deliverables, Work Elements, Metrics, and Methods

Metrics and methods will need to be made clear in the design. At a finer level than the interacting effects described above, rarely is a habitat response (e.g., side channel development) independent of other habitat changes (e.g., flood plain reconnection). Separating a single response from all other habitat responses, say in a reach, could be difficult. The design will also need to clearly lay out how this will be addressed.
Documentation Links:

2008 FCRPS BiOp Workgroup Assessment

Assessment Number: 2009-014-00-BIOP-20101105
Project Number: 2009-014-00
Review: RME / AP Category Review
Proposal Number: RMECAT-2009-014-00
Completed Date: None
2008 FCRPS BiOp Workgroup Rating: Response Requested
Comments: BiOp Workgroup Comments: For compliance with RPA 57.4: This project should implement protocols and data collection methods comparable to the CHaMP protocol developed by ISEMP. If possible the project should consider changing data collection methods to the CHaMP protocol, for use in regional assessment models. For compliance with RPA 57.5: This project needs to participate in the model development workgroup with the Action Agencies, NOAA, and Council. Project may only contribute data and may not have a deliverable to participate in the regional coordination and model development.
Please clarify where are you placing your screw traps. There is no mention of relationships with ODFW projects that are already collecting juvenile data in the Umatilla and Upper Grande Ronde and John Day.

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: (61.3)
All Questionable RPA Associations (57.4 57.5 ) and
All Deleted RPA Associations ( )
Proponent Response:

CTUIR Response

This biomonitoring plan will be implemented through existing CTUIR M&E programs which is consistent with how ODFW is proposing to implement each of the proposed IMW projects (ODFW Umatilla O&M project and Grande Ronde life history project).  The biomonitoring design will utilize monitoring efforts comparable to CHaMP protocol with emphasis on the biological response to habitat restoration.  CTUIR will continue to coordinate and integrate efforts of model watersheds, ODFW, CRITFC, USFS, and BOR efforts that focus on viable salmon population criteria and habitat effectiveness monitoring.  A biomonitoring plan will include standardized monitoring metrics for determining habitat effectiveness at the watershed, stream segment, and stream reach scale.  CTUIR will participate in model development with actions agencies to standardized metrics are used.  The biomonitoring plan will complement and enhance co-manager data collection methods in an effort to avoid overlap and maximize the efficient use of resources to be in compliance with RPA 57.4 and 57.5.

 

CTUIR has operated screw traps in the Umatilla River at approximate RM 54.0, 76.0, and 81.0.  Continuation of a screw trap is certain at RM 81.0 and tentative at RM 54.0 and 76.0.  CTUIR does not operate screw traps in the John Day and upper Grand Ronde rivers.  CTUIR will coordinate those efforts with ODFW to collect the necessary information and if not we will coordinate with ODFW efforts to expand trapping.


Project Relationships: None

Name Role Organization
Deborah Docherty Project Manager Bonneville Power Administration
Gene Shippentower Project Lead Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR)
Kaylyn Costi Project Lead Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR)
Luca De Stefanis Env. Compliance Lead Bonneville Power Administration