View and print project details including project summary, purpose, associations to Biological Opinions, and area. To learn more about any of the project properties, hold your mouse cursor over the field label.
Province | Subbasin | % |
---|---|---|
Columbia Plateau | Snake Lower | 100.00% |
Description: Page: 7 Figure 3: Location of the Tucannon River, and Lyons Ferry and Tucannon Hatcheries within the Snake River Basin (Gallinat et al. 2010). Project(s): 2010-042-00 Document: P125747 Dimensions: 983 x 759 Description: Page: 8 Photo 1: Lower Tucannon River PIT Tag Array as redeployed in 2010. Project(s): 2010-042-00 Document: P125747 Dimensions: 976 x 732 |
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
Number | Contractor Name | Title | Status | Total Contracted Amount | Dates |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
BPA-005674 | Bonneville Power Administration | PIT Tags - Tucannon Exp PIT Tagging FY11 | Active | $30,553 | 10/1/2010 - 9/30/2011 |
51112 SOW | Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) | 201004200 EXP TUCANNON EXPANDED PIT TAGGING | History | $34,435 | 1/1/2011 - 12/31/2011 |
BPA-006403 | Bonneville Power Administration | PIT Tags - Tucannon Exp PIT Tagging FY12 | Active | $25,206 | 10/1/2011 - 9/30/2012 |
55732 SOW | Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) | 2010-042-00 EXP TUCANNON EXPANDED PIT TAGGING | History | $39,004 | 1/1/2012 - 12/31/2012 |
BPA-006952 | Bonneville Power Administration | PIT Tags - Tucannon Exp PIT Tagging FY13 | Active | $18,596 | 10/1/2012 - 9/30/2013 |
59993 SOW | Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) | 2010-042-00 EXP EXPANDED PIT TAGGING TUCANNON RIVER | History | $46,684 | 1/1/2013 - 12/31/2013 |
BPA-007747 | Bonneville Power Administration | PIT Tags - Tucannon Exp PIT Tagging FY14 | Active | $19,485 | 10/1/2013 - 9/30/2014 |
63682 SOW | Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) | 2010-042-00 EXP TUCANNON RIVER: EXPANDED PIT TAGGING (COMBINE) | History | $45,635 | 1/1/2014 - 6/30/2014 |
Annual Progress Reports | |
---|---|
Expected (since FY2004): | 4 |
Completed: | 4 |
On time: | 4 |
Status Reports | |
---|---|
Completed: | 14 |
On time: | 8 |
Avg Days Late: | 1 |
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 |
BPA-5674 | PIT Tags - Tucannon Exp PIT Tagging FY11 | Bonneville Power Administration | 10/01/2010 | 09/30/2011 | Active | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
51112 | 55732, 59993, 63682 | 2010-042-00 EXP TUCANNON RIVER: EXPANDED PIT TAGGING (COMBINE) | Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) | 01/01/2011 | 06/30/2014 | History | 14 | 19 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 23 | 100.00% | 0 |
BPA-6403 | PIT Tags - Tucannon Exp PIT Tagging FY12 | Bonneville Power Administration | 10/01/2011 | 09/30/2012 | Active | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
BPA-6952 | PIT Tags - Tucannon Exp PIT Tagging FY13 | Bonneville Power Administration | 10/01/2012 | 09/30/2013 | Active | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
BPA-7747 | PIT Tags - Tucannon Exp PIT Tagging FY14 | Bonneville Power Administration | 10/01/2013 | 09/30/2014 | Active | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
Project Totals | 14 | 19 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 23 | 100.00% | 0 |
Assessment Number: | 2010-042-00-ISRP-20100622 |
---|---|
Project: | 2010-042-00 - Tucannon Expanded Pit Tagging |
Review: | Fast Track ISRP Review 2010 |
Completed Date: | None |
First Round ISRP Date: | 2/24/2010 |
First Round ISRP Rating: | Meets Scientific Review Criteria |
First Round ISRP Comment: | |
This is a well-justified project that will help to fill important data gaps for natural origin summer steelhead in the Tucannon River. If critical assumptions are met and objectives are successfully achieved, information will be available to improve management decisions for recovering Tucannon steelhead. The ISRP cautions that analysis and interpretation of straying and migration data may prove difficult because (1) a certain % of straying for steelhead is common/normal, and (2) not all detected cases of unexpected migration may be attributed to hydrosystem effects. (See comments in Section 3, below.) 1. Technical Justification, Program Significance and Consistency, and Project Relationships This project proposes to PIT tag emigrating natural origin summer steelhead collected from the Tucannon smolt trap and utilize an existing PIT tag detection array to estimate smolt to adult (SAR) of summer steelhead and thus escapement as a measure of population status. As this is a critically depressed population and accurate estimates are not available, this appears to be a high priority and well justified project. The data collected by this project are also expected to contribute to a better understanding of the relationship between hatchery and natural fish abundance in the Tucannon. The proponents note that past smolt monitoring results have been effective in obtaining a relative measure of natural origin steelhead production from the Tucannon River. Part of the justification is that adult numbers are needed to meet management and population VSP monitoring criteria. An additional justification is that these data will contribute to continued monitoring of unexpected migration patterns to aid in understanding hydrosystem effects on the Tucannon River steelhead population for management decisions in the future. This project appears consistent with the 2008 Washington State Steelhead Management Plan, the 2008 Federal Columbia River Power System (FCRPS) Biological Opinion (BiOp) (RPAs 50.6, 50.7, and 62.4), and the Snake River Salmon Recovery Plan for Southeast Washington (2006). Only one project (#201002800 currently proposed) is specifically stated as related to this one in the narrative, but the Administrative Form lists four other projects that this project is related to. The relationships of how this coordination and data sharing with these projects will be done are adequately described. 2. Project History and Results This is a new project but will use an existing PIT tag array installed in the Tucannon River by the USFWS for monitoring bull trout behavior. The array was given to WDFW because the bull trout work has been completed. Efficiency of detections by array (for bull trout if available) would be helpful to compare with steelhead detection data. 3. Objectives, Work Elements, and Methods The primary objective of the proposed project is to estimate the annual abundance of natural origin summer steelhead returning to the Tucannon River. The objective is clearly stated and measurable, the methods brief, but adequate, and the ISRP liked to see that the critical assumptions were included. Secondary objectives are: (1) monitor the straying of natural origin Tucannon steelhead within the Snake River and its tributaries; Comment: However, a certain percent of straying for steelhead is common/normal so interpretation may be difficult. (2) describe and quantify the hydrosystem effects on this population; Comment: For this secondary objective it seems that all detected cases of unexpected migration may be attributed to hydrosystem effects, and this may not be a valid interpretation. (3) monitor the proportion of hatchery and wild steelhead returning to the river to assess the potential affects of the hatchery program on the natural spawning population structure (pHOS). Comment: The length of the project is stated as 8 to 10 years, to cover two generations—why not three generations? At least three generations may be needed to assess full potential effects of hatchery fish on wild fish. In sum, the monitoring of migration paths of adults at dams and PIT tag detectors in the Tucannon and other locations with subsequent evaluation appears to be well planned. The project personnel appear highly qualified to carry out this project, and if critical assumptions are met, the project has a good likelihood for success. |
|
Documentation Links: |
Assessment Number: | 2010-042-00-NPCC-20101007 |
---|---|
Project: | 2010-042-00 - Tucannon Expanded Pit Tagging |
Review: | RME / AP Category Review |
Proposal: | RMECAT-2010-042-00 |
Proposal State: | Pending BPA Response |
Approved Date: | 6/10/2011 |
Recommendation: | Fund (Qualified) |
Comments: | See Programmatic Issue #2. Also see Fast Track Jan 2011 Council decision. |
Conditions: | |
Council Condition #1 Programmatic Issue: RMECAT #2 Habitat effectiveness monitoring and evaluation—. |
Assessment Number: | 2010-042-00-BIOP-20101105 |
---|---|
Project Number: | 2010-042-00 |
Review: | RME / AP Category Review |
Proposal Number: | RMECAT-2010-042-00 |
Completed Date: | None |
2008 FCRPS BiOp Workgroup Rating: | Response Requested |
Comments: |
BiOp Workgroup Comments: Power analysis should be conducted to determine how many fish to tag will deliver the desired precision. Furthermore precision could be increased by PIT-tagging adults instead of juveniles for the purposes of estimating escapement. The BiOp RM&E Workgroups made the following determinations regarding the proposal's ability or need to support BiOp Research, Monitoring and Evaluation (RME) RPAs. If you have questions regarding these RPA association conclusions, please contact your BPA COTR and they will help clarify, or they will arrange further discussion with the appropriate RM&E Workgroup Leads. BiOp RPA associations for the proposed work are: ( 50.6 63.1 63.2 64.2 62.4 62.5 63.1 63.2) All Questionable RPA Associations ( ) and All Deleted RPA Associations ( ) |
Proponent Response: | |
Sample Size Calculations for SARs and Straying Rates at the Tucannon River
To: Joseph D. Bumgarner WDFW - Fish Biologist Snake River Lab 401 S. Cottonwood Dayton, Washington 99362
From: John R. Skalski Richard L. Townsend Columbia Basin Research School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences University of Washington 1325 Fourth Avenue, Suite 1820 Seattle, Washington 98101-2509
21 December 2010
IntroductionThis report provides sample size calculations for PIT-tag releases of wild steelhead and hatchery spring Chinook salmon in the Tucannon River. For each stock, precision curves as a function of PIT-tag release size were derived for estimating smolt-to-adult ratios (SARs) and the conditional probability of straying given adult return. Precision was defined as the anticipated half-width of either a 90% or 95% confidence interval. Sample size calculations were based on anticipated (i.e., historical) SARs and straying rates. For wild steelhead, the average historical SAR was 0.0182 with a conditional staying probability of 0.50. For hatchery Chinook salmon, the average historical SAR was 0.0023 with a conditional straying rate of 0.25–0.50. Statistical MethodsThe estimate of SAR is calculated as (1) where = pit-tag release size, = total number of adult returns, with associated variance, . (2) The conditional straying probability is estimated as (3) where = number of adult returns that strayed, with associated variance, . (4) However, in sample size calculations, is an unknown random variable, and as such, the uncertainty in the number of adult returns needs to be taken into account. The unconditional variance of the straying estimate can be calculated in stages, where , where 1 denotes binomial sampling of given , 2 denote binomial sampling of given . It then follows (5) The first term in Eq. (5) is associated with binomial sampling of straying given adults returned. The smaller second term in Eq. (5) is associated with the uncertainty in how many adult returns upon which will be calculated. Precision of the SAR estimate will be defined in terms of absolute error where
and where . In other words, precision is defined in terms of the desired half-width of a 100% confidence interval (CI). The precision of the straying probability will be defined analogously where , where is the square root of Eq. (5). Precision CurvesFigures 1 and 2 plot the anticipated half-widths of either a 90% of 95% CI for SARs as a function of PIT-tag release size . For example, with a release size of 25,000 steelhead, the SAR will have an anticipated precision of 0.002 when = 0.0182, 95% of the time. For hatchery Chinook salmon, the anticipated precision with a release of 25,000 fish is 0.001 95% of the time when the true value of = 0.0023,. Figures 3 and 4 plot the anticipated half-widths of either a 90% of 95% CI for the conditional probability of straying as a function of PIT-tag release size . Again using a release size of 25,000, the steelhead should have an anticipated precision of 0.10 and hatchery spring Chinook salmon will have a precision of 0.15 for a 95% CI when the true straying rate is 0.50. Precision levels for the other release sizes can be read directly from Figures 1, 2, 3, and 4.
Figure 1. Anticipated precision of SAR estimates as a function of PIT-tag release size for wild steelhead . Precision defined as the anticipated half-width of a 100% confidence interval.
Figure 2. Anticipated precision of SAR estimates as a function of PIT-tag release size for hatchery spring Chinook salmon. Precision defined as the anticipated half-width of a 100% confidence interval.
Figure 3. Anticipated precision of estimates of straying probability as a function of PIT-tag release size for wild steelhead. Precision defined as the anticipated half-width of a 100% confidence interval
Figure 4. Anticipated precision of estimates of straying probability as a function of PIT-tag release size for hatchery spring Chinook salmon. Precision defined as the anticipated half-width of a 100% confidence interval.
|
Name | Role | Organization |
---|---|---|
Joe Bumgarner (Inactive) | Supervisor | Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) |
Daniel Gambetta | Env. Compliance Lead | Bonneville Power Administration |
Andre L'Heureux (Inactive) | Project Manager | Bonneville Power Administration |
Todd Miller | Project Lead | Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) |