FY 2000 proposal 198740100
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Assessment of Smolt Condition: Biological and Environmental Interactions |
| Proposal ID | 198740100 |
| Organization | U.S. Geological Survey, Biological Resources Division, Columbia River Research Laboratory (USGS) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator |
| Name | R. M. Schrock, A. G. Maule |
| Mailing address | 5501A Cook-Underwood Rd. Cook, WA 98605 |
| Phone / email | 5095382299 / [email protected] |
| Manager authorizing this project | |
| Review cycle | FY 2000 |
| Province / Subbasin | Mainstem/Systemwide / Systemwide |
| Short description | Evaluate the biology of wild and hatchery salmonids by determining the effects of rearing and river conditions on smolt quality; assist hatchery managers in producing fish with wild-like characteristics and thereby increase smolt-to-adult returns. |
| Target species | salmonids species: Oncorhynchus spp. |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
| Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
|---|
Section 2. Past accomplishments
| Year | Accomplishment |
|---|
| 1998 |
Obj.1 & 2. hatchery evaluation in progress |
| 1998 |
Obj. 3. results of lysozyme research reported |
| 1998 |
Obj 4. provided technical assistance to 2 USFWS, 2 USGS, 1 COE, and 4 WDFW smolt monitoring projects |
| 1998 |
Assessment of Smolt Condition for Travel Time Analysis: Project Review 1987-1997 |
| 1998 |
Developed cooperative project with USFWS, Idaho Fishery Resource Office under Obj 4. |
| 1998 |
Sponsor 20th Smolt Workshop in cooperation with WDFW, scheduled Feb 1-3, 1999 Olympia, Washington |
| 1997 |
Hatchery rearing conditions survey completed for 10 hatcheries |
| 1997 |
Smolt condition assessment technical assistance to 15 projects, including to 3 USFWS, 2 USGS, 2 COE, 4 WDFW |
| 1997 |
Cooperative research with USFWS to determine effects of enhanced feeds on growth and disease resistance in chinook salmon |
| 1996 |
Cooperative research with USFWS to enhance smolt performance with glucan feeds, continued monitoring for FPC |
| 1995 |
Conducted cooperative research with USFWS, continued monitoring for FPC |
| 1995 |
Conducted gas bubble monitoring of juvenile salmon at 6 dams on the Snake and Columbia Rivers, continued monitoring for FPC |
| 1994 |
Sampling with NMFS Lower Granite Survival Study continued from 1993, continued monitoring for FPC |
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
| Project ID | Title | Description |
|---|
| 9102900 |
Supplementation and survival of fall chinook in Snake River |
smolt assessment technical assistance |
| 9801005 |
Pittsbugh Landing Creek portable acclimation release facility |
smolt assessment technical assistance |
|
USGS-Performance and stock productivity impacts of hatchery supplementation |
smolt assessment technical assistance |
|
USGS-COE Eval.of Collection, Transport, Passage of Outmigrating Salmon |
smolt assessment technical assistance |
|
WDFW-Cowlitz Falls Anadromous Fish Reintroduction Project |
smolt assessment technical assistance |
|
WDFW-Snake River Lab Acclimation and direct stream release of chinook |
smolt assessment technical assistance |
|
WDFW, Chelan PUD-Temperature, precocity, residualism in steelhead |
smolt assessment technical assistance |
|
WDFW-Survival differences in coho salmon under seminatural rearing |
smolt assessment technical assistance |
| 8740100 |
Assessment of Smolt Condition: Biological and Environmental Interactions. |
|
| 9082 |
Evaluate feeding strategies to reduce residualism in steelhead |
|
| 20542 |
Biological Monitoring of Columbia Basin Salmonids |
|
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2000 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase
Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2000 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase
Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2000 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase
Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2000 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
Section 8. Estimated budget summary
Itemized budget
| Item | Note | FY 2000 cost |
|---|
| Personnel |
2 FT, 2 1/4T |
$107,272 |
| Fringe |
|
$25,341 |
| Supplies |
|
$5,000 |
| Operating |
|
$0 |
| Capital |
computer upgrade and software for database |
$3,500 |
| Travel |
includes vehicle for 6 months |
$4,500 |
| Indirect |
|
$53,433 |
| $199,046 |
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2000 cost | $199,046 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2000 budget request | $199,046 |
| FY 2000 forecast from 1999 | $0 |
| % change from forecast | 0.0% |
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|
|
All technical assistance projects cover materials and labor for the assistance activities (figure based on 1997 & 1998). |
$10,000 |
unknown |
Other budget explanation
Schedule Constraints: Coordination of technical assistance activities within cooperative agency project
schedules.
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Recommendation:
Delay Funding
Date:
Jun 15, 1999
Comment:
Recommendation:
Delay funding until they provide a more precise statistical analysis protocol that is supported by the sampling design and data. The entire set of smolt monitoring projects needs to receive a programmatic review with one of the goals to develop and justify a program-wide design that really is capable of delivering enough data, of high enough precision, to answer the management questions.
Comments:
The proposal explains and references the need for addressing the problem. The relationship with high priority programs is clearly presented. The objectives are clearly stated. However, a statistically sound analysis of the data is essential. Collaboration with statistical support personnel from other funded projects is recommended. There is a need for a review of the overall design. They need to explain how river conditions will be measured in order to establish relevance to the experimental subjects. The design is too complicated, convoluted, and overly optimistic. A bottleneck in their design is their ability to measure smolt to adult survival. They are going to establish physiological indicators but it is not assured that they will be able to make any correlation.
Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Aug 20, 1999
Comment:
Recommendation:
Date:
Aug 20, 1999
Comment:
This project should be re-named. Provides tech. support for other smolt physiology projects. Does not fit only under SMP.
Recommendation:
Date:
Aug 20, 1999
Comment:
Technical Criteria 1: Met? Yes - Question the need to continue this work. What is needed is a summary of the results of the past 10+ years work.Programmatic Criteria 2: Met? Yes -
Milestone Criteria 3: Met? No -
Resource Criteria 4: Met? Yes -
Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Oct 29, 1999
Comment:
Fund. The response did an acceptable job of addressing gaps identified in the ISRP comments. The statistical analysis protocol for this project is clearer now. The proposed methods of analysis are appropriate for the purposes of the project. The fact that the initial analyses are exploratory indicates that establishment of correlation between specific rearing and river conditions on smolt quality may not be possible. This problem is a consequence of the relatively few years of data of outmigration performance. The proposed methods of statistical analysis are clear but it is not clear whether the anticipated data will be sufficient in quantity or quality to support meaningful conclusions.
The ISRP continues to emphasize that the entire smolt monitoring program needs a programmatic review: there are many outstanding questions about overall design, priorities, coordination, data management, and information synthesis from the results.
Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Nov 8, 1999
Comment:
Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Mar 1, 2000
Comment:
[Decision made in 11-3-99 Council Meeting]