Record No. 00006.

pdf

000052
000053
 Draft
Confidential and FOIA Exempt
For Litigation Support Purposes

Important R,M&E Focus Areas

(NOTE: this is a preliminary list that has not been well vetted. Each comment or question/topic
from the science panel is provided in numerical outline format in 1-23. These have been aligned
based on the current FCRPS RM&E strategies highlighted in bold. Modeling is part of the
“evaluation” component of RM&E for the various strategies. We still need to crosswalk
between this list and the extensive set of R,M&E measures already planned to identify any gaps.)

Habitat
RM&E Strategy 3—Tributary Habitat RM&E (FCRPS RPA 56 and 57); &
RM&E Strategy 4—Estuary and Ocean RM&E
1. Generally: need to better understand relationship between habitat quality and fish
response – tributaries, estuary and ocean. Specifically, especially in tributaries, need to
understand relationship between habitat quality, quantity and arrangement and fish
numbers and habitat quality, quantity and arrangement and fish survival, growth and
condition. (BPA Notes: Expanded habitat status and trend monitoring (e.g., flow,
temperature, sediment, channel complexity, riparian area/composition, floodplain
connectivity, habitat access, land use conversion, etc.); Greater coverage of geographic
and hydrologic systems in the Columbia basin in the Intensively Monitored Watersheds
program; and Improved understanding of relationships between habitat quality and fish
response (e.g., stream/watershed- and population-scale estimates of juvenile out
migrants per adult spawner; size and condition of juveniles; etc.)
- AAs are currently expanding habitat monitoring as part of action effectiveness
evaluations for RPAs 56 and 57 that include ongoing and additional IMW studies, and
general habitat monitoring paired with fish in and fish out monitoring to cover 1
population per MPG.
- Activities cover this expansions are being supplemented with 9 million dollars in BiOp
placeholder funds.
- BPA is proposing to add 2 million dollars in expanded habitat monitoring and 1 FTE to
address this need.
- BPA is proposing to add 1.0 FTE for additional freshwater and estuary habitat RM&E
planning and coordination, $150,000

2. Need information on how fish respond to current climatic variation as it affects tributary
flows and temperatures (Note: The baseline may not be stable as assumed, and may be
declining due to land use, water use, and human pop trends; again, the modeling
framework is designed in concept to address this (Mary Ruckelshaus) (if #1 is done
properly, this element would be included). (Chris Jordan)
3. Better information on deterioration in environmental baseline, both from climate change
(and climate variability) and other impacts.
- BPA is proposing to add $200K technical support plus 0.2 FTE for Climate Change
information tracking
- BPA is proposing to add $500k for additional climate change information in IMWs
000054
 Draft
Confidential and FOIA Exempt
For Litigation Support Purposes
4. Need an inventory of thermal refugia –
- Comment: Too static, need a process for understanding the thermal heterogeneity within
watersheds, this is covered by the elements above and below this one.. (Chris Jordan)
- Comment: BPA believes this is a gap because coordinated remote sensing studies are
funded identified to support the IMW or habitat work?)
- Gap: Thermal mapping inventory is uncoordinated and needs further design coordination

5. Need to look at effects of water withdrawals, hyporeic zone changes, and identify
distribution of cool water refuge areas for salmon and determine whether they’re
changing over time.
6. Need a complete water budget (including groundwater); and
7. Need a region wide assessment of groundwater resources (USGS? Other state or federal
agencies?).
- Gap?
- Look at Columbia basin water exchange online web resource. (Need to add ground water
to the inventory)

8. Need better understanding of ocean processes. (Note: try to disentangle trends from
variability, forecast FW changes, etc.)
- Comment: Way too vague – which ocean processes and why? Ocean entry timing and
fish condition and near shore ocean productivity as a function of climate (upwelling, f/w
inputs) are two key ones that need to be better integrated into life cycle monitoring and
modeling and resource management planning. (Chris Jordan)
- This is a NOAA Issue for Lead: Clarify beyond NOAA NWFSC model for Coho and
Chinook: i.e. the need for Fall Chinook, chum and sockeye models. (Russell Scranton)

Fish Population Monitoring

RM&E Strategy 1—Monitor Status of Selected Fish Populations Related to FCRPS Actions

9. Need better information on smolt abundance from natural production, and smolt size and
condition. Juvenile out migration population sizes must have quantified confidence
bounds and be linked to adult population (TRT) domains in a quantifiable manner.
- AAs are currently expanding habitat monitoring as part of our action effectiveness
evaluations for RPA 56 and 57 that include ongoing and additional IMW studies, and
general habitat monitoring paired with fish in and fish out monitoring to cover 1
population per MPG.
- BPA is proposing to add $100K technical support plus 0.3 FTE for annual evaluations of
productivity, biological and environmental metrics for contingency triggers.

10. Adult population abundance monitoring must be based on methods capable of

quantifying uncertainty (confidence intervals on counts and spatial/temporal
representativeness of estimates). In particular, straying of natural and hatchery origin
adults as a function of FCRPS operation and habitat condition.
- BPA is proposing to add BPA Fish in and Fish Out monitoring Mentioned above in #1
- PNAMP Integrated Status and Trend Monitoring Design project for fish monitoring .

000055
 Draft
Confidential and FOIA Exempt
For Litigation Support Purposes
11. Need for explicit spatial modeling of populations/MPGs/ESUs – populations are not
independent of one another – need to better understand interactions between populations
within an ESU.
- Gap? NWFSC work?

12. PIT tag based estimates of stage specific survival and return rates need to be developed
at least for representative stages and populations. These population monitoring efforts
need to be coordinated with habitat quantity, quality and arrangement monitoring to
support evaluations of habitat condition on fish population processes. Habitat and fish
monitoring must be coordinated.
- Gap? NWFSC work? Pit Tag workgroup?

13. Spatially explicit lifecycle modeling should be developed for representative populations;
this approach could integrate mitigation actions, hatchery actions, predators and invasive
species, as well as habitat condition and the impacts of climate change on all of the
above if and only if the monitoring infrastructure to parameterize such models was
implemented. Current f/w monitoring could form the basis for such a program, but key
stage specific survival terms are gaps (egg – fry as a function of habitat condition), and
some ESUs are poorly understood in general (e.g. SR steelhead). Implementing
population and habitat monitoring with the goal to parameterizing a management model
would be a novel and critically important improvement over current programmatic
objectives. (Chris Jordan)
- See FCROS RPA 50 and RM&E Work group High Priority Recommendation
- Additional Requirements?

RM&E Coordination and Data Management

RM&E Strategy 8—Coordination and Data Management

14. Need to monitor status and trends of habitat in a coordinated fashion, but most
importantly, in a fashion that tracks the baseline and is sensitive to the changes brought
about through mitigation actions.
- BPA is working with PNAMP and funding the Integrated Status and Trend Monitoring
project to implement a Master Sample design
- Current proposal for PNAMP monitoring placeholder for habitat and fish designs, to
provide sample designs and methods

15. More timely reporting of spawner-recruit information at the population level (not
specifically a science workshop recommendation, but included in the contingency
paper); (Note: Faster, more efficient reporting of annual adult returns (at population and
MPG level(BPA Comment))
- This issue is currently being addressed within the Regional Coordination, Data
Management, and Fish Population RM&E strategies, and pending BPA, CBFWA, NPCC and
NOAA Collaboration workshops).
- An additional $1 million in BiOp funding has been added for expanded data management
and coordination of information sharing. In addition, BPA has a specific project placeholder
funding of $50k annually designated for technical support contracts for increased abundance
tracking.
000056
 Draft
Confidential and FOIA Exempt
For Litigation Support Purposes
- This is also being addressed in NOAA’s NWR 2009 “Draft RM&E strategy for VSP and
Listing factor Monitoring” (Title to be validated)
- BPA is proposing to add Additional 0.1 FTE Action Agency support for planning and
coordination of this information.
- Address efficiencies of reporting within RIOG technical workgroup.

Predation & Interspecific Interactions

RM&E Strategy 7—Predation Management RM&E
16. What are the impacts of invasive introduced species on individual ESUs? (BPA Notes
Effects of non-native predator/competitor species in mainstem reaches and tributaries;
and develop quantitative descriptions of interactions with salmon and steelhead
(productivity, smolt size and condition, food web, etc.)
- BPA has funded 350,000 a year to support non native species
- BPA is proposing to add additional 1 million plus 0.3 FTE to support additional monitoring
in of inter and intra specific interactions.
- NOAA NWFSC work? (Beth Sanderson)

Interspecific Interactions
17. Need for ecosystem-level modeling of interactions between species and trophic levels.
Stable isotope monitoring programs for key / representative populations would establish
baseline food webs that should be considered in designing mitigation actions and
evaluating potential climate change impacts. (Ecosystem models);
- Gap
18. Need for studies on the interactions between multiple factors that could adversely affect
fish – disease, for instance, and water temperatures.
- Gap in need to integrate with IMWs
- See NOAA NWFSC BKDE Puget Sound studies, what other studies are needed?

19. We need better information on how interspecific interactions affect individual species.
This must include impacts of hatchery fish on other ESUs. This baseline information
would be necessary in order to do the “system-level” modeling that was discussed (see
below Modeling and Hatchery Section).

Invasive introduced species

20. Improvements to COMPASS including effects of predation.
- BPA is proposing to add $100K for new COMPASS development (already $200k in
placeholder)

21. Bounties for predator control were considered to be a poor tactic. An example was
given of sea lamprey in the Great Lakes where research indicated that larvae produce a
pheromone that would attract all sea lamprey within a medium-sized lake. Do we have
research underway that would allow us to find creative ways to deal with predators,
especially non-native species?
- Gap: No current or proposed research on pheromones or other removal techniques

Hatchery Effects & Intraspecific Interactions

RM&E Strategy 6—Hatchery RM&E 000057
 Draft
Confidential and FOIA Exempt
For Litigation Support Purposes

22. Better understanding of broad range of hatchery effects on wild populations. Ecological
and evolutionary impacts of hatchery programs need to be considered in management of
hatchery operations. The scale of the effects, in time and space, needs to be determined
by systematic hatchery program monitoring.
- Gap:
- What is the role of the RM&E plan and appendix of the NOAA Columbia River Estuary
Module Recovery Plan: Estuary intraspecific interactions and density dependence.
- Comment: There is a need to clarify what RM&E will come out of the HGMP RM&E
requirements .

23. How can climate and ocean indicators be integrated into hatchery management?
- BPA is proposing to add $300k for Hatchery Program real time management support
based on early ocean conditions monitoring (already $200k in placeholder).
- Link to Hydro modeling for the plume for Steelhead

John Ferguson’s e-mail notes needing to be added or clarified: John can you clarify where
these comments need to be integrated?

-Effects of toxics, disease outbreaks, natural catastrophes (fire, flood, drought), and new
pathogens was discussed but we haven't really dealt with these so much
(Toxics are outside the scope of FCRPS for in lieu purposes and may be a need for NOAA to
address)
- Dan's comment to adopt IUCN standards, where the threat is expressed not as a change in
numbers of individuals or pops, but as a change in a rate.
( Where is this integrated into?)
-Opinion is that we continue to skip over aggressive actions to address FW climate change. Are
there possibilities here that could be added? (Ferguson)

Appendix A:
FCRPS RM&E Report: High Priority Recommendations

Table 1. FCRPS RM&E workgroup High priority recommendations.

RPA # High Priority Recommendations
50.1 PTaGIS database be revised and expanded to meet needs of tributary active and passive
detections.
50.5 Systematically sample returning adult steelhead at Lower Granite Dam for genetics and
age structure and mark the fish with PIT tags. Establish remote PIT-tag interrogation
systems near the mouths of the Selway, Lochsa, South Fork, Lolo Creek and upper
Salmon.
50.6 Fill gaps in existing steelhead population status monitoring.
50.7 Implement and document 100% hatchery release external marking.

000058
 Draft
Confidential and FOIA Exempt
For Litigation Support Purposes
62.3 Evaluate post-release mortality from different types of fisheries across a wide range of
natural temperature regimes. Effects need to be tracked to the spawning grounds to
determine pre-spawning mortality of fish captured and released (need control group for
comparison). The group also recommends that individual coded tags (and associated
externally visible tag) are used to assess this. A workshop that focuses on defining
goals, objectives, and methodology to measure post-release mortality of fish to the
spawning areas should be convened as soon as possible. The information developed in
this workshop can then be used to develop a targeted RFP. A preliminary assumption on
effort is approximately $1.5 million per year over three years. All efforts should be
made to collaborate on this research with other entities, like the USACE or PUDs if they
have research needs that could utilize radio tags.
63.1 RFP for specific B-run monitoring (need to determine if CRITFC Accord project 2008-
723 fills the gap for abundance and productivity), but "safety net" triggers still need to
be investigated. Monitoring of B-Run steelhead is addressed in part under RPA 50.5.
Additional information on the importance of filling this gap can be found in the fish
population/tributary habitat workgroup recommendations section of this report.
64.3 Develop RFPs for both populations, with potential cost sharing for Methow steelhead.
For Methow steelhead, there is a need to coordinate with Douglas PUD through their
HCP Hatchery Coordinating Committee (and potentially the USFWS). BPA has
initiated discussions.

The workgroup recommends convening a meeting with appropriate stakeholders to

determine
goals, objectives, and methods. Additional discussion will need to take place to
determine
potential cost sharing. The results of the meetings will aid in the development of a
targeted
RFP
65.1 RFP needs to be developed. The workgroup recommends convening a meeting with
appropriate stakeholders to determine goals, objectives, and methods. Additional
discussion will need to take place to determine potential cost sharing. The results of the
meetings will aid in the development of a targeted RFP.
The Corps and BOR need to integrate project and action implementation with NOAA
73.2 and BPA’s project tracking systems to support BiOp and recovery implementation
tracking, coordination, and reporting needs. Develop standardized project tracking
metrics for all RPA action and project types such as habitat restoration and protection,
harvest and hatchery management, and research and monitoring. When updated metrics
and crosswalks for a standard project tracking data dictionary is drafted from NOAA
and the AAs, we recommend using PNAMP as a forum to work with other
environmental resource management entities to finalize and endorse standard
implementation tracking metrics for regional use.

000059