Concerning CWT application, we understood that all hatchery production would be CWT ... but the task only refers to tagging 400,000 chinook? Is this a value left over from a previous proposal? Further, authors must also clarify the basis of the tagging cost projected. With a production of 800K juveniles, the projected tag cost per individual is much higher than in other tagging programs.

Part 2 of this task involves coho salmon. The hypothesis stated for coho salmon is another assumption, how would this statement be tested and related to reproductive success? The coho work is not compatible with the statement of the task. The coho work is more related to habitat suitability for spawning and egg survival. The committee is doubtful of the merit of constructing stream reaches in the artificial channel. In natural environments, site selection may involve many more variables than substrate composition. Further, how would the effect of hatchery ancestry be isolated from the substrate effect ... where is the related information on "wild" coho spawning success in these substrates? We also are doubtful that substrates of known composition can be artificially constructed and stable through the spawning period. We not support of this coho task as presently described.

OBJECTIVE

ISRP COMMENT

1.Natural Production

1a. Natural Production & Modeling:

YKFP managers should clarify why EDT data collection and modeling is not described in more detail and/or included under a separate proposal. While the response provided was extensive, it very definitely demonstrated why a more comprehensive proposal and review for this activity is necessary in the future. The ISRP identified numerous technical questions about the material received, but do not wish to initiate another series of reviews and responses. Fundable

1b. Yakima Fall chinook survival study

This task is not adequately described, particularly if feasibility work has been conducted. The response agreed with the ISRP comments and provided adequate clarification. Fundable

1c. Spring chinook micro-habitat use

This task is likely to be largely descriptive but may also be useful in EDT assessments... proceed given the modest cost. Fundable

1d. Spring chinook PIT tagging & CWT application

Recommend continuation. Further, authors must also clarify the basis of the tagging cost projected. The response noted the error in presentation and provided adequate response. The ISRP noted though that the power to detect a 50% effect size indicates that their procedures are going to be fairly insensitive to change. Whether this is adequate depends on the management application. Fundable

1e. Roza PIT tagging of W & H spring chinook

Re-state and clarify the hypothesis ... as stated it is not clear how this hypothesis relates to the task. Recommend continuation. Response provided a series of simple hypotheses that were more correctly stated. Fundable

1f. Chandler monitoring

Recommend continuation and refinement of smolt estimation procedures. Adequate response. Fundable

1g. Accelerated rearing of Fall chinook

The response provided a correctly stated hypothesis and we agree with the additional comments provided. Fundable

1h. Coho stock and date of release study

Clarify the present intent of this study. The response agreed that there had been an error in the description of this project and provided adequate response. Fundable

1i. Spring chinook juvenile behavior

We place a lower priority on this work compared to other tasks. The brevity of the ISRP comments obviously lead to a misunderstanding ... for this we apologize. Our comment centered on identifying one behavioral trait that can be associated with a change in overall survival. We certainly do not contest the issue of behavioral differences between treatments, but what is the likelihood that one trait can be directly associated with smolt-to-adult survival? This is particularly true when the comparisons are made after release and adjustment of smolts to the riverine environment. Consequently, as described, we continue to place a lower priority on this project. The study design does not ensure that they will produce valuable results. They will likely be chasing hypotheses. They need to describe an explicit set of hypotheses to test at the onset of the experiment, these were not adequately presented. Not fundable.

1j. Spring chinook morphometric and coloration

Comparison of body morphology and coloration in wild fish and hatchery fish reared under OCT and SNT. As in task 1i. We place a lower priority on this work compared to other tasks (but these costs are substantially less than for task 1i.). No response. Fundable at low priority

1k. Smolt physiology

Not considered in this proposal. No money requested for this task in this proposal.

Recommend continuation. No additional comments. Fundable

1m. Adult monitoring at Roza and Cowiche dams

Recommend continuation. No additional comments. Fundable

1n. Spawning ground surveys

While the ISRP strongly supports this task, we question whether sufficient resources are assigned to this task. This response is inadequate as the surveys as described cannot answer the hypotheses (or issues) stated as examples. Further, the response does not address other spring stocks, coho, or steelhead. This task is central and critical to the YKFP but we continue to recommend that the YKFP review these programs to ensure they provide the necessary data. Consideration of whether indices and trends are adequate or more quantitative data are needed is critical in this review. Fundable, but a report from these considerations is recommended.

1o. Natural spawning observations

Response is adequate, presuming that this work is conducted. No associated budget was requested.

1p. Spring chinook residuals & precocial study

Recommend completing this investigation. No further comment. Fundable

1q. Hatchery / Wild reproductive success

The response acknowledged the need to clarify the coho portion of this project and identified two activities: identification of spawning and acclimation sites, and evaluation of reproductive success of introduced hatchery coho salmon. The initial challenge for coho salmon is simply to get naturalized spawners back into the Yakima system ... and initial returns have been encouraging. The study of how a "domesticated hatchery" coho stock could re-adjust to natural conditions would be an interesting investigation but the baseline for such a study should already have been collected (or being so). The ISRP continues to recommend proceeding with the spring chinook work (Fundable), and we continue to have many comments on the coho project (Not fundable without further review). For example, the approach to use one large acclimation site does not seem designed to match the life history and behavior of coho. The approach of using numerous, small-scale, local, temporary acclimation facilities on tributaries is better suited to coho life history patterns.

In this final review, we have two suggestions for the coho project: separate this restoration activity into a separate project description so that the basis of the plan can be more fully described and reviewed, and as part of the YKFP annual program review, organize a comprehensive review of the coho restoration program. This program could then be submitted to Council for review and funding.

1s. Scale analysis

Response is adequate. Fundable

1t. Fish Health

Not included in the budget, work coordinated with samples already available from Chandler facility and analyzed by USFWS

1w. Sediment impacts on habitat

This task is poorly described. Authors must clarify before support is recommended. The response notes that this program is basically a monitoring program ... but is the data collected incorporated into any restoration programs. Once an area of sediment problem is identified how is it addressed, or is it simply incorporated as a limiting factor into the EDT model. Clarification of how this data will be used would strengthen this project. The ISRP recommends proceeding with this task. Fundable

2. Harvest

2a. Out-of-Basin monitoring

While there are no costs associated with this task, are there information needed by investigators that they presently do not have? The response noted it is "difficult" to obtain data but did not comment on whether there is data that is necessary and not provided by outside agencies.

2b. In-basin monitoring

The response is adequate but we have two comments: a 10% sampling rate is less than conducted in many other fisheries but could be appropriate in these fisheries if the marking rate is high, the need for incidental mortality information depends on the management requirements. We would recommend that the number of tags being recovered with a 10% sampling rate be reviewed to ensure that objectives are being met, and that a program to examine incidental mortality rates be implemented. The latter will soon be required under the total mortality management provision of the Pacific Salmon Treaty. Fundable

3. Genetics

3a. DNA data collection & analysis

Recommend funding for analyses but reporting required before continued funding is provided ... however we would expect this monitoring to continue beyond the "first full cycle of adult returns" as suggested in the text. The response is adequate but we note that no comment is provided on the publication of results, and that only 250 "returnees" will be sampled under this budget. How can this be an adequate sample size to determine the pedigree data? We would strongly recommend a review of sample allocation within this budget to ensure that the priority tasks are being addressed first. Fundable, following review of sample allocation.

3b. Stray recovery ...

A good response was provided for this task, the ISRP recommends proceeding. Fundable

3c. Domestication study

As the ISRP has commented above, we believe there is an immediate need to establish a pure hatchery stock within the Cle Elum facility in order to study domestication and contrast with the supplementation groups currently being reared in the facility. The response acknowledged the importance of this issue, and the ISRP appreciated the detailed response. However, we feel the response misrepresented an important point of the original review. Within the comments on project 3c (Domestication), the ISRP recommended HxH control lines ... but in our general comments on supplementation the ISRP strongly recommended both a HxH and WxW comparisons. The ISRP in NOT recommending only a HxH line, nor the HS design as stated. The response identified three concerns about domestication research: direct measurement, disruption to supplementation effort, and limitations due to life history. While direct comparison is the essence of our comments and is essential, none of the other comments are really limitations to implementing what the ISRP recommended. While we acknowledge that the WxW "line" will not be a fully controlled experiment as the HxH line could be, we continue to recommend this as an essential feature of the experimental design.

Not fundable until an adequate experimental design is achieved that includes a HxH and WxW control, or fully justifies why not.

4. Ecological Interactions

Most of these tasks could be considered individual research studies and may be more thoroughly described in a separate project. Our concern was that such a brief statement does not provide any insight into the activity or provide any technical basis for review. We agree that potential impact of supplementation on non-target species is an important issue and merits investigation ... but our task is to advise on the science applied to assess these impacts. A project proposal must provide the basis for review. Given the scope and costs of projects under Ecological Interactions, we suggest that one comprehensive proposal would be more informative and appropriate for this process. Fundable in concept but the methods must described in detail sufficient to allow for scientific review.

4a. Avian predation index

Recommend support for a few years, but the need for an on-going continual program is uncertain. The response agreed with ISRP comments. Fundable

4b. Fish predation index

The response agreed with ISRP comments and the YKFP has been developing plans to "implement experimental management" of fish predators. Fundable

4c. Indirect predation

We place a lower priority on this work compared to other tasks. The ISRP comments about the budget stemmed from not fully understanding the procedures to be used. Again this is an example of providing limited information on procedures due to combining all activities into one large project. The response adequately clarified our concerns and we recommend support. Fundable

4d. Competition / Prey index

No further comments. Fundable

4e. NTTOC

We do not have adequate information upon which to evaluate methods, impacts, etc. Good response, Fundable.

4f. Pathogen sampling

This seems to be an obvious source of concern in an otherwise comprehensive set of tasks ... and should be clarified. Adequate response, Fundable.