Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program
RSS Feed for updates to Project 2010-057-00 - Snake Basin Steelhead Assessments Follow this via RSS feed. Help setting up RSS feeds?

Project Summary

Project 2010-057-00 - Snake Basin Steelhead Assessments

Please Note: This project is the product of one or more merges and/or splits from other projects. Historical data automatically included here are limited to the current project and previous generation (the “parent” projects) only. The Project Relationships section details the nature of the relationships between this project and the previous generation. To learn about the complete ancestry of this project, please review the Project Relationships section on the Project Summary page of each parent project.

Project Number:
2010-057-00
Title:
Snake Basin Steelhead Assessments
Summary:
This project was put in 2012-2014 NPCC Provincial Review and received a fund status and BPA desires to contract the project by August 1, 2011

This project will monitor the effectiveness of B-run steelhead hatchery (supplementation) in the Clearwater River subbasin. Short term productivity will be assessed through Relative Reproductive Success (RRS) in Lolo Creek. Comparative performance of conventional and supplemental production strategies will be evaluated in the South Fork Clearwater River. This project will also validate PIT tag array-based status and trend estimates and facilitate a run-reconstruction of Snake Basin steelhead.
Proposer:
Proponent Orgs:
Nez Perce Tribe (Tribe)
Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) (Govt - State)
Starting FY:
2011
Ending FY:
2020
Stage:
Implementation - Project Status Report
Area:
Province Subbasin %
Basinwide - 100.00%
Purpose:
Artificial Production
Emphasis:
RM and E
Focal Species:
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

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"

To see more detailed project budget information, please visit the "Project Budget" page

Decided Budget Transfers  (FY2019 - FY2021)

Acct FY Acct Type Amount Fund Budget Decision Date
FY2019 Expense $520,290 From: BiOp FCRPS 2008 (non-Accord) FY19 Nez Perce Budgets 11/07/2018
FY2019 Expense $470,089 From: BiOp FCRPS 2008 (non-Accord) Dec 14th SOY Transfers FY19 12/14/2018
FY2019 Expense $31,270 From: General - Within Year BOG FY20-Q1 December - Correction 12/05/2019
FY2019 Expense $66,027 From: BiOp FCRPS 2008 (non-Accord) Dec 11th Transfers 12/11/2019
FY2019 Expense $66,027 To: BiOp FCRPS 2008 (non-Accord) 2010-057-00 FY20 12/12/2019
FY2020 Expense $1,048,379 From: BiOp FCRPS 2008 (non-Accord) FY20 Remaining Budgets 09/20/2019
FY2020 Expense $31,270 From: General - Within Year BOG FY20-Q1 December 12/05/2019
FY2020 Expense $31,270 To: General - Within Year BOG FY20-Q1 December - Correction 12/05/2019
FY2020 Expense $66,027 From: BiOp FCRPS 2008 (non-Accord) 2010-057-00 FY20 12/12/2019

Pending Budget Decision?  No


Actual Project Cost Share

Current Fiscal Year — 2020   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
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014 $0 0%
2013
2012 $0 0%
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-006219 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - B-Run Steelhead Supplementation Active $58,080 10/1/2011 - 9/30/2012
BPA-009543 Bonneville Power Administration PIT Tags - B-Run Steelhead Supplementation Active $1,740 10/1/2016 - 9/30/2017
BPA-011994 Bonneville Power Administration FY20 - Pit Tags Active $5,474 10/1/2019 - 9/30/2020
74017 REL 62 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 2010-057-00 EXP SNAKE BASIN STEELHEAD ASSESSMENTS Issued $1,114,406 1/1/2020 - 12/31/2020
BPA-012098 Bonneville Power Administration FY21 Pit Tags Active $0 10/1/2020 - 9/30/2021
CR-343059 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 2010-057-00 EXP B-RUN STEELHEAD SUPPLEMENTATION Pending $1,114,406 1/1/2021 - 12/31/2021



Annual Progress Reports
Expected (since FY2004):11
Completed:4
On time:4
Status Reports
Completed:37
On time:25
Avg Days Late:0

Historical from: 1997-030-00
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
333 REL 31 4600, 20615, 25619, 30562, 35429, 40142, 45340, 50063, 55018, 59539, 63467, 67519, 70924, 74547, 74017 REL 4 1997-30 LISTED STOCK CHINOOK ESCAPEMENT MONITORING Nez Perce Tribe 01/2000 01/2000 Closed 54 168 0 0 4 172 97.67% 2
BPA-005220 PIT TAGS - STEELHEAD IN JOSEPH CREEK - FAST TRACK Bonneville Power Administration 10/2009 10/2009 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-005605 PIT TAGS - STEELHEAD IN JOSEPH CREEK Bonneville Power Administration 10/2010 10/2010 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-006245 PIT Tags - Steelhead in Joseph Creek Bonneville Power Administration 10/2011 10/2011 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-007732 PIT Tags - Steelhead in Joseph Creek Bonneville Power Administration 10/2013 10/2013 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-008393 PIT Tags - Steelhead in Joseph Creek Bonneville Power Administration 10/2014 10/2014 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-008916 PIT Tags - Steelhead in Joseph Creek Bonneville Power Administration 10/2015 10/2015 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-009582 PIT Tags - Steelhead in Joseph Creek Bonneville Power Administration 10/2016 10/2016 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Project Totals 91 273 17 0 28 318 91.19% 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
54313 60211, 63432, 67492, 70707, 74546, 74017 REL 14, 74017 REL 34, 74017 REL 62 2010-057-00 EXP B-RUN STEELHEAD SUPPLEMENTATION Nez Perce Tribe 08/2011 08/2011 Pending 37 105 17 0 24 146 83.56% 1
BPA-006219 PIT Tags - B-Run Steelhead Supplementation Bonneville Power Administration 10/2011 10/2011 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-009543 PIT Tags - B-Run Steelhead Supplementation Bonneville Power Administration 10/2016 10/2016 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-011994 FY20 - Pit Tags Bonneville Power Administration 10/2019 10/2019 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Project Totals 91 273 17 0 28 318 91.19% 3


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: 1997-030-00-ISRP-20100623
Project: 1997-030-00 - Secesh chinook & Joseph Creek steelhead abundance monitoring
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:
In general, this proposal demonstrates good fisheries science. However, parts of this project are difficult to assess. In particular, it’s a combination of two projects with little in common (different species, equipment, even subbasins), and the relation between them was unclear.

The need for continued Chinook monitoring at Secesh was well documented, and the addition of steelhead trout monitoring at Joseph Creek is justified as a benefit to the Fish and Wildlife Program, but it is not clear why the new steelhead program is to be combined with the Chinook program. Why is the proposed steelhead weir in this proposal and not in Integrated Status and Effectiveness Monitoring project (ISEMP; BPA Project No. 200301700I) that has a fast-track proposal “to install two PIT tag arrays in lower Joseph Creek and two arrays in the lower Grande Ronde River?”

1. Technical Justification, Program Significance and Consistency, and Project Relationships
The proposal has two parts:

1) The Secesh River is an unsupplemented stream, in the South Fork Salmon River drainage in Idaho, which acts as a reference stream for three ongoing Chinook supplementation evaluation programs. It is the only stream in the Snake River Basin where monitoring of natural origin salmon escapement occurs absent a hatchery supplementation program. Salmon escapement monitoring will be continued using dual frequency identification sonar (DIDSON). It was begun in 2004.

2) This project also includes the new fast track Joseph Creek steelhead escapement monitoring project. It would use a floating weir to provide status monitoring of adult steelhead in Joseph Creek in the lower Grande Ronde River in Washington.

The Secesh DIDSON monitoring is effective. It is operational a high percentage of the time, produces a good count, and has been in operation for a number of years. The program is consistent with BiOp goals, etc.

2. Project History and Results
The Secesh component has a long history. It has been yielding good results for at least 5 years from DIDSON technology. The Johnson Creek steelhead project is in early development–it's not even clear where an adult counting weir structure can be emplaced.

3. Objectives, Work Elements, and Methods
PIT tag arrays have been installed in the lower Secesh River to quantify both natural origin adult salmon and steelhead escapement. A comparison of PIT tag array escapement data with DIDSON salmon escapement information collected by this proposal will be performed over a period of years. The objectives and methods proposed for use in Joseph Creek seem reasonable and appropriate.

A detailed explanation of methods including statistical methods is provided
Documentation Links:
Review: RME / AP Category Review

Council Recommendation

Assessment Number: 2010-057-00-NPCC-20101018
Project: 2010-057-00 - Snake Basin Steelhead Assessments
Review: RME / AP Category Review
Proposal: RMECAT-2010-057-00
Proposal State: Pending BPA Response
Approved Date: 6/10/2011
Recommendation: Fund (Qualified)
Comments: Implement with condition through 2016: Implementation subject to regional hatchery effects evaluation process described in programmatic recommendation #4.
Conditions:
Council Condition #1 Programmatic Issue: RMECAT #4 Hatchery Effectiveness—subject to regional hatcery effects evaluation process
Council Condition #2 Qualification: The proponents should integrate this monitoring with the Columbia River hatchery evaluation team and collect metrics consistent with the Ad Hoc Supplementation Work Group.
Assessment Number: 1997-030-00-NPCC-20110502
Project: 1997-030-00 - Secesh chinook & Joseph Creek steelhead abundance monitoring
Review: RME / AP Category Review
Proposal: RMECAT-1997-030-00
Proposal State: Pending BPA Response
Approved Date: 6/10/2011
Recommendation: Fund (Qualified)
Comments: Implement with condition through 2016 per April-May 2010 decision for Fast Track projects: Implementation subject to regional 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

Independent Scientific Review Panel Assessment

Assessment Number: 2010-057-00-ISRP-20101015
Project: 2010-057-00 - Snake Basin Steelhead Assessments
Review: RME / AP Category Review
Proposal Number: RMECAT-2010-057-00
Completed Date: 12/17/2010
Final Round ISRP Date: 12/17/2010
Final Round ISRP Rating: Meets Scientific Review Criteria
Final Round ISRP Comment:
Reviewers point out that their support of this project should not be construed as an indication of blanket support of supplementation (see programmatic comments). The LSRCP artificial production activities are being initiated with the M&E funded through the Fish and Wildlife Program, and much of the production is under the "supplementation" category. Reviewers note that goals that are required under a supplementation strategy are unlikely to be realized and are difficult to justify. There is little evidence that supplementation has made a positive contribution to the abundance of natural-origin adults, particularly in settings where the natural population is not replacing itself. Projects established for harvest mitigation, rather than natural population rebuilding, conducted under an experimental framework are perhaps more consistent with the environmental conditions faced by the fish and the program objectives of the managers.

The project would gain some important new information on Clearwater B-run steelhead. The response addressed most of the items requested and worked toward clarifying the few major issues. The most important issue, the need for a reference-control design, is addressed by discussing two options, neither of which is ideal. The second option, using "in and out" data from A- and B-run fish from a mixture of streams within and without the Clearwater, appears preferable but far from strong.

The proponents advocate the need for a three generation-long study. Because they will likely continue supplementation past a single generation, they will likely need to continue the M&E to monitor those hatchery release returns. However, if the results become clear that the strategy is not meeting its goals, reviewers maintain that three full generations of monitoring would not be needed.

A trend analysis in parr abundance should be informative and is suggested. If it is consistent, it may suggest the habitat is adequately seeded by fry to meet parr requirements, and that the steelhead population may be limited by available parr habitat (capacity). However, here, as elsewhere and throughout streams entering the Pacific coast, the major limitation to abundance appears to occur in the ocean.

There continues to be a need for consistency among supplementation efforts. The proponents should integrate this monitoring with the Columbia River hatchery evaluation team and collect metrics consistent with the Ad Hoc Supplementation Work Group.
First Round ISRP Date: 10/18/2010
First Round ISRP Rating: Response Requested
First Round ISRP Comment:
This is a very nicely crafted proposal. The current situation is clearly described and problems laid out, followed by a clear and logical development of the proposed work. Testable hypotheses are presented.

The tasks to monitor B-run steelhead supplementation in Lolo Creek and the South Fork Clearwater River are needed, actually a requirement, for assessment of the restoration strategy. One piece that is missing is a contrast between the abundance trend in the treatment streams and reference sites. This needs to be clarified in a response, and the proposal is not justified without the contrast.

A response is requested to explain the basis for increasing the smolt releases at these sites. It appears that the releases are conducted under the auspices of the Lower Snake River Compensation Plan (LSRCP). The ISRP anticipates a sequential review of Lower Snake River Compensation Plan spring Chinook, fall Chinook, and steelhead production programs over three years (one species annually) beginning in December 2010. This LSRCP review will provide an opportunity to revisit the scientific basis of the release numbers, empirical data on the programs results, and assess the adequacy of the experimental designs.

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

This project will monitor the effectiveness of B-run steelhead hatchery (supplementation) in the Clearwater River subbasin. Short term productivity will be assessed through Relative Reproductive Success (RRS) in Lolo Creek. Comparative performance of conventional and supplemental production strategies will be evaluated in the South Fork Clearwater River. This project will also endeavor to validate PIT tag array-based status and trend estimates and facilitate a run-reconstruction of Snake Basin steelhead.

According to the proposal, “The 2008-2017 U.S. vs. Oregon Management Agreement designated 200,000 unclipped (supplementation) steelhead reared at Dworshak National Fish Hatchery (DNFH) released into Lolo Creek and 330,000 unclipped steelhead reared at the Clearwater Anadromous Fish Hatchery (CAFH) released into tributaries of the South Fork Clearwater River (SFCR). These releases are in addition to the 840,000 conventionally reared, AD-clipped, steelhead smolts released into the SFCR each year. The motivation behind the unclipped fish releases is escapement from down-river fisheries and increased contribution to natural production to bolster natural steelhead population abundances. The brood stock composition of the supplementation releases (e.g., integration of natural adults into the brood stock) and the increase of these releases from the current level of 60,000 into Lolo Creek to full production (200,000) will be decided by tribal, state, and federal co-managers. Therefore, this project is structured as an observational study of management actions, as per the recommendation of ISRP/ISAB.”

Also to be evaluated is the possibility of a velocity barrier existing below the stocked tributaries of the SFCR, in the vicinity of Golden, Idaho. This seems an important item.

2. History: Accomplishments, Results, and Adaptive Management

Very little history and results of work accomplished thus far were presented. No data were presented despite releases since 2006 and earlier. Unclipped smolt releases (50,000, to increase to 200,000) into Lolo Creek are to bolster natural production. What evidence that this is working? Are there associated issues with unclipped hatchery fish that confound other studies?

The presentation of preliminary data analyzing abundance, behavior, performance and survival of natural, conventional and supplementation returns to date is needed. The population monitoring appears needed, but there remain questions of its benefit.

Fifteen years for supplementation results, or three generations seems lengthy – would not the returns from one generation (>five years) be sufficient, particularly given other, better studies?


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

Relationships with other studies on supplementation appear to be lacking. Questions may be best addressed in more detailed studies elsewhere.

4. Deliverables, Work Elements, Metrics, and Methods

Methods and metrics are clearly delineated and seem generally appropriate. The proposal uses existing facilities plus new facilities being Fast Track funded.

There is insufficient detail on results to date, parentage analyses, sample size availability, and sample size requirements. The section (Objective 8) on steelhead run construction was confusing. There is also need for development of a decision framework and time scale for several elements of the work, particular the supplementation evaluation, with indication of key indices or reference points for management action.
Documentation Links:
  • Proponent Response (11/15/2010)

2008 FCRPS BiOp Workgroup Assessment

Assessment Number: 2010-057-00-BIOP-20101105
Project Number: 2010-057-00
Review: RME / AP Category Review
Proposal Number: RMECAT-2010-057-00
Completed Date: None
2008 FCRPS BiOp Workgroup Rating: Response Requested
Comments: BiOp Workgroup Comments: For compliance with RPA 50.7: This RPA action is for hatchery fish marking only. Confirm that the scope of work proposed is for 100% marking of fish (visible or non visible) from the hatchery supported. If this project is marking fish for the hatchery, please specify the hatchery name and populations affected. If marking is conducted under another project or program, please let us know the name of that project/program.

In addition BPA would like to discuss further coordination in data management needs of this project to support RPA 72.

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: (50.7 50.5 63.1)
All Questionable RPA Associations (50.7 72.1 72.2 72.3 ) and
All Deleted RPA Associations (71.2)
Proponent Response:

This project is an observatioal study of management actions and will not be marking hatchery fish. 

Assessment Number: 1997-030-00-BIOP-20101105
Project Number: 1997-030-00
Review: RME / AP Category Review
Proposal Number: RMECAT-1997-030-00
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: (50.6 62.5 64.2)
All Questionable RPA Associations ( ) and
All Deleted RPA Associations (63.1)
Proponent Response:
This is response to a request to clarify linkage between the Chinook Salmon Adult Abundance Monitoring project and RPA 63.1. RPA 63.1 is designed to determine effect of safety-net & conservation hatchery programs: Determine the effect that safety-net and conservation hatchery programs have on the viability and recovery of the targeted populations of salmon and steelhead. The Secesh River natural origin Chinook salmon population acts as a control stream under the Idaho Salmon Supplementation studies (Bowles and Leitzinger 1991) and a reference stream for the Johnson Creek and Northeast Oregon Hatchery supplementation programs monitoring and evaluation plans (Vogel et al. 2005, Hesse et al. 2006). Adult escapement and progeny-per-parent ratio (productivity) information from a reference stream, the Secesh River, are compared to supplementation program performance to separate environmental effects from supplementation effects. 
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review

Council Recommendation

Assessment Number: 1997-030-00-NPCC-20090924
Project: 1997-030-00 - Secesh chinook & Joseph Creek steelhead abundance monitoring
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Approved Date: 10/23/2006
Recommendation: Fund
Comments:

Independent Scientific Review Panel Assessment

Assessment Number: 1997-030-00-ISRP-20060831
Project: 1997-030-00 - Secesh chinook & Joseph Creek steelhead abundance monitoring
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Completed Date: 8/31/2006
Final Round ISRP Date: None
Final Round ISRP Rating: Meets Scientific Review Criteria
Final Round ISRP Comment:
The response was excellent in resolving both some rough spots in the original proposal and clarifying for the ISRP our misconceptions. They clarify that the project is not nearing termination, but intend for it to provide enumeration of adult summer Chinook in the Secesh River over the long-term. They explained the pilot project the ISRP referred to, and noted it was being completed with collections in 2006. They provided a succinct summary of the challenges of enumerating adult salmon using redd counts and discussed a timeframe to establish the precision and accuracy of estimates using DIDSON technology. The sponsors also clarified the methods they use to validate estimates using DIDSON, that hatchery and natural spawners and spawner ages are determined from carcass surveys, not from the DIDSON technology. Finally they clarified the status of video counts at Lake Creek, and the relationship between monitoring Lake Creek, Secesh River, and their roles as reference streams for Snake River spring and summer Chinook abundance and productivity. The roles of Lake Creek and Secesh monitoring provide good justification for continuation of the project.
Documentation Links:

Legal Assessment (In-Lieu)

Assessment Number: 1997-030-00-INLIEU-20090521
Project Number: 1997-030-00
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Completed Date: 10/6/2006
In Lieu Rating: Problems Exist
Cost Share Rating: None
Comment: Wild adult salmon stock abundance; other entities (fishery managers) authorized required to conduct this work. Needs cost share or some other remedy.

Capital Assessment

Assessment Number: 1997-030-00-CAPITAL-20090618
Project Number: 1997-030-00
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: This project Merged From 1997-030-00 effective on 10/1/2018
Relationship Description: Project budget for project 1997-030-00 is being merged with project 2010-057-00 permanently starting in FY19. Project 1997-030-00 closed out for FY19.


Name Role Organization
Jay Hesse Supervisor Nez Perce Tribe
Jason Vogel Project Lead Nez Perce Tribe
Paul Krueger (Inactive) Supervisor Bonneville Power Administration
Daniel Gambetta Env. Compliance Lead Bonneville Power Administration
McLain Johnson Interested Party Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW)
Peter Cleary Project Lead Nez Perce Tribe
Russell Scranton Project Manager Bonneville Power Administration
Russell Scranton Project SME Bonneville Power Administration